Delhi High Court Quarterly Digest: October To December, 2024 [Citations 1081 - 1394]

KALAWATI v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1105

RAM PREET v. STATE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1106

MANCHU VISHNU VARDHAN BABU ALIAS VISHNU MANCHU v. AREBUMDUM & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1107

RANJEET KUMAR THAKUR v. UOI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1108

Master Capital Services Limited & Anr. vs. John Doe & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1109

Parikshit Grewal & Ors versus Union of India & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1110

AIR FORCE SPORTS COMPLEX (AFSC) v. LT. GEN S S DAHIYA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1111

AMIT KUMAR DIWAKAR v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1112

PayU Payments Private Limited v. The New India Assurance Co Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1113

LAVA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs MINTELLECTUALS LLP 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1114

Avinesh Kumar vs. Delhi Development Authority And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1115

FLFL TRAVEL RETAIL LUCKNOW PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1116

St. Stephan College vs. Vikash Gupta And Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1117

UJWAL GHAI v. DELHI HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE (DHCLSC) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1118

YUDHVEER SINGH YADAV v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INESTIGATION THROUGH SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1119

STATE v. MANPAL & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1120

MICHAEL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. v. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1121

Mriksha Corporation Pvt Ltd v. Absolute Legends Sports Pvt Ltd & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1122

M/s Agarwal Associates (Promoters) Limited v. M/s Sharda Developers 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1123

AMIT KUMAR GUPTA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1124

Satish Kumar vs. Union of India & Others 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1125

DSSSB and Anr. v. Dinesh Mahawar & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1126

Sunil Kumar Tewatia v Jain Cooperative Bank 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1127

Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. Rajender and Others 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1128

Corrtech International Pvt Ltd v. Delhi International Arbitration Center and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1129

Emeka Prince Lath vs. State NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1130

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS versus PARMILA DEVI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1131

SMT USHA DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1132

RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL v. CENTRAL INFOMATION COMMISSIONER AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1133

SWARANJIT SINGH NARULA SECURITY AGENCY v. NTPC LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1134

Hameedullah Akbar@ Faheem Modh Zai vs. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1135

Devasia Thomas & Anr. vs. Government Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1136

Dalmia Family Office Trust & Anr. vs. Getamber Anand & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1137

Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1138

COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION IN RE: SUICIDE COMMITTED BY SUSHANT ROHILLA, LAW STUDENT OF I.P. UNIVERSITY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1139

X v. Y 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1140

SANTOSH KUMAR AND ORS. v. STATE THROUGH SHO PS NEW ASHOK NAGAR AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1141

STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ANR versus SHUBHAM PAL ANR ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

GIRRAJ PRASAD GURJAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

ICRI CORPORATES PRIVATE LIMITED v. SHOOGLO NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY OMG NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Versus ANAND MOHAN SHARAN & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

Amir Malik vs. Commissioner of GST 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

ASHA RANI GUPTA versus RAVINDERA MEMORIAL PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

DR. RAJAN JAISWAL v. M/S SRL LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1149

ANITA GUPTA SHARMA v. CHAMBER ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE & OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1150

National Highways Authority of India v. Guruvayoor Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1151

OBI OGOCHUKWA STEPHEN v. STATE and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1152

HARKISHANDAS NIJHAWAN v. CPIO, SPECIAL BRANCH OF DELHI POLICE & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1153

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA V. M/S IRB AHMEDABAD VADODARA SUPER EXPRESS TOLLWAYS PVT. LTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1154

Apex Body Leh v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1155

Shahrukh Pathan v. State 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1156

Punita Bhardwaj vs. Rashmi Juneja 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1157

JHAJHARIA NIRMAN LTD. v. SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAYS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1158

The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 v. Esys Information Technologies Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1159

UNION OF INDIA & ORS versus JAGDISH SINGH & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1160

BCC DEVELOPERS & PROMOTERS PVT. LTD v. BHUPENDER SINGH & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1161

Satwant Singh Sanghera v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1162

KKH FINVEST PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR v. JONAS HAGGARD & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1163

M/S. M.V. OMNI PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1164

LALIT MOHAN v. M/S. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL CO. FEDERATION OF INDIA LTD. (NAFED) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1165

Madhu Koda vs. State Thru CBI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1166

UNION OF INDIA v. MS KRISHNA CONSTRUCTIONS COMPANY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1167

SPORTA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., AND ANR. v. HONG YI F35 AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1168

AKASH TANWAR v. STATE OF DELHI & ORS and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1169

Ms CP Rama Rao Sole Proprietor v. National Highways Authority Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1170

SK v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DELHI POLICE HQ, ITO, DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1171

Airports Authority of India vs. Delhi International Airport Ltd. & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1172

Shamlaji Expressway Private Limited v. National Highways Authority Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1173

HOME AND SOUL PRIVATE LIMITED V. T.V. TODAY NETWORK LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1174

DELHI FIRE WORKS SHOPKEEPERS ASSOCIATION v. DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1175

M SAMUNDRA SINGH versus UOI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1176

ANAND MISHRA v/s THE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1177

PEC LIMITED v. ADM ASIA PACIFIC TRADING PTE. LTD. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1178

M/S STAR SHARES & STOCK BROKERS LTD. V. PRAVEEN GUPTA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1179

UOI vs. COL (TS) SHYAMA NAND JHA (RETD.) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1180

PANKAJ KUMAR TIWARI v. ED and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1181

NARESH KUMAR BAJAJ v. BUNGE INDIA PVT. LTD. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1182

Civil And Sessions Court Stenographers Association (Regd) & Anr vs. Shri Vijay Kumar Dev 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1183

Ram Niwas versus Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1184

Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran vs. The Union Of India & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1185

Shadab Ahmad v State of NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1186

Union of India vs. OCL Iron and Steel Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1187

M/s Jain Cement Udyog (Through Its Proprietor Sh. Sanjay Jain) v. Sales Tax Officer Class-II 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1188

SOCIAL JURIST, A CIVIL RIGHTS GROUP V/s MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1189

Vaibhav Jain vs. Directorate Of Enforcement & Connected Matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1190

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION V.SPRING TRAVELS PVT LTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1191

M/S INNOVATIVE FACILITY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD v. M/S AFFORDABLE INFRASTRUCTURE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1192

Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1220

Mankind Pharma Limited vs. Aquakind Land LLP & ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1221

Bharat Broadband Network Ltd v. Paramount Communications Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1222

HR BUILDERS THROUGH GPA HOLDER V. DELHI AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1223

RUDRA BUILDWELL PVT LTD. v. REALWORTH INDIA PVT LTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1224

ASHNEER GROVER v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1225

N.S. ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. versus THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1226

Adani Enterprises Limited vs. Shri Somnath Fabrics Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1227

MANISH SAINI versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1228

VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1229

M/s Travel2Agent.com & Ors. vs. M/s Spice Jet Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1230

GAS AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD versus SAW PIPES LTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1231

X v. Y 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1232

SMT. REENA DEVI v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1233

SURESH KUMAR KAKKAR & ANR versus M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1234

KHALID JAHANGIR QAZI THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MS FARIDA SIDDIQI v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1235

Sanjay Bhandari vs. Directorate of Enforcement2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1236

JKR Techno Engineers Pvt Ltd v. JMD Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1237

Inder Pal Singh Gaba vs. National Investigation Agency 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1238

BALAJI STEEL TRADE versus FLUDOR BENIN S.A. AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1239

Ms Shubhangi Gupta v. Commissioner Of Customs & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1240

SMT. PROMILA RASTOGI & ORS v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1241

Raffles Education Corporation Ltd vs. State Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1242

SH. R.S. MEENA versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1243

STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ORS. versus AMAN SINGH 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1244

CENTAURUS GREEN ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED versus RAJSHREE EDUCATIONAL TRUST 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1245

ANI v. RSY News & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1246

Kanwar Singh Yadav vs. Delhi Tourism and Transport Development Corporation Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1247

Gautam Gambhir v. State 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1248

SHABANA v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1249

SUBATA KHAN v. GNCTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1250

HINA BASHIR BEIGH v. NIA and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1251

ARPIT BHARGAVA v. GNCTD & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1252

Aswhini Upadhyay v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1253

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1254

ADITYA SINGH TOMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1255

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1256

In-Time Garments Pvt. Ltd. versus HSPS Textile Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1257

P Chidambaram v. ED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1258

Aakash Goel vs. Union of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1259

SANJAY AGGARWAL v. ED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1260

HARI OM RAI v. ED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1261

PRANAV KUCKREJA (IN POLICE CUSTODY) v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1262

Netaji Subhash Institute Of Technology Versus M/S Surya Engineers & Another 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1263

JAMIA ARABIA NIZAMIA WELFARE EDUCATION SOCIETY v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS VICE CHAIRMAN & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1264

Himanshu Garg v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-36 (1) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1265

ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK (INDIA) LIMITED v. HTTPS//TUNEINCOM/PODCASTS/ARTS—CULTURE PODCASTS/ BANGLA-SUNDAY-SUSPENSE-P2082186 / AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1266

TIRUPATI NARASHIMA MURARI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1267

MATRIX CELLULAR INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED AND ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1268

Dr. R.N. Gupta Technical Educational Society versus M/s Intec Capital Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1269

Vivo Mobile India Private Limited v. Customs Authority For Advance Rulings & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1270

SACHIN KUMAR AGGARWAL v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1271

ABC v. State & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1272

M/S Srinivasa Construction Corporation Pvt Ltd Versus Irrigation Works Circle, Through Superintendent Engineer District, Uttar Pradesh 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1273

Unthinkable Solutions LLP Versus Ejohri Jewels Hub Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1274

Sandeep Hooda v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-7, Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1275

Sequential Technology International India Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known As Omniglob Information Technologies(India)Pvt.Ltd) v. Addl. CIT, Spcl.Range-7 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1276

Chandani Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal v. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1277

Louis Vuitton Malletier v/s Abdulkhaliq Abdulkader Chamadia & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1278

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7, Delhi v. Naveen Kumar Gupta 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1279

The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6 v. Nucleus Steel Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1280

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Versus M/s Fiberfill Engineers 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1281

Delhi High Court Rejects Woman's Plea Seeking FIR Into Daughter's Death In 2013 Over Alleged Political Conspiracy Involving Arvind Kejriwal

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1105

The Delhi High Court has recently rejected a petition filed by a mother seeking registration of FIR into her daughter's death in 2013 pursuant to an alleged political conspiracy involving former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, Kumar Vishvas and other Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) workers.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed the plea filed by Kalawati who challenged the trial court order passed last year rejecting her application seeking registration of FIR under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Delhi High Court Issues Directions To Prevent Delay In Releasing Compensation To POCSO Survivors

Title: RAM PREET v. STATE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1106

The Delhi High Court has issued directions to prevent delay in releasing compensation by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) to the survivors in POCSO cases.

A division bench comprising of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma that there is clearly a disconnect between the POCSO Courts and the concerned Delhi State Legal Service Authorities on the issue.

Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order To Protect Personality Rights Of Indian Actor And Producer Vishnu Manchu

Title: MANCHU VISHNU VARDHAN BABU ALIAS VISHNU MANCHU v. AREBUMDUM & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1107

The Delhi High Court has recently passed a john doe order to protect the personality rights of Indian actor and film producer Vishnu Manchu who is known for his work primarily in Telugu cinema.

Justice Mini Pushkarna was dealing with Vishnu's suit seeking protection of his name, voice, image, likeness and all other elements of his personality. The suit was filed against the unauthorized use of his personality elements, alleging that the same were used by third parties which was likely to create confusion and deception amongst the public.

Delhi High Court Directs District Courts To Ensure Recording Advocates' Appearances In Order Sheets, Calls For 'Drop Box', 'Chat Box' System

Title: RANJEET KUMAR THAKUR v. UOI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1108

The Delhi High Court has recently directed all the district courts in the national capital to ensure that the appearances of advocates are properly recorded in the order sheets.

Justice Sanjeev Narula directed the Principal District and Sessions Judge (Headquarters) to issue necessary instructions to all District Courts on the issue.

Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order To Protect Trademark Of Master Capital Services, Asks Meta To Block WhatsApp Accounts Misusing Mark

Case title: Master Capital Services Limited & Anr. vs. John Doe & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1109

The Delhi High Court has issued an ex-parte temporary injunction against unidentified individuals, restraining them from using the trademark 'Master Trust', owned by Master Capital Services Limited.

The Court also directed Meta, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and Department of Telecommunications to block WhatsApp accounts of groups, which are claiming association with Master Capital and asking public to invest funds.

Litigants Must First Approach Administrative Tribunal In Matters Even Regarding Irregularities Concerning Recruitment To Posts Under Union And Not High Court Directly: Delhi High Court

Case Tittle: Parikshit Grewal & Ors versus Union of India & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1110

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain held that the Administrative Tribunal has the jurisdiction, powers and authority exercised by all the courts in relation to recruitment and matters in relation to recruitment to a civil post under section 14(1) of the Administrative Tribunals Act

Air Force Sports Complex Not A 'Public Authority' Under RTI Act: Delhi High Court

Title: AIR FORCE SPORTS COMPLEX (AFSC) v. LT. GEN S S DAHIYA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1111

The Delhi High Court has observed that the Air Force Sports Complex (AFSC) is not a 'public authority' under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) on the ground that the government does not exercise significant control over AFSC and its operations are not dependant on funding from the government.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea To Disqualify BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra From Rajya Sabha, Imposes ₹25K Costs

Title: AMIT KUMAR DIWAKAR v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1112

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to disqualify Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra from the Rajya Sabha, with costs of Rs. 25,000.

Justice Sanjeev Narula rejected the plea moved by Advocate Amit Kumar Diwakar, who alleged that Mishra, while holding the office of Chairman of BCI, which is a statutory body, cannot simultaneously serve as a sitting member of the Rajya Sabha.

Repudiation Of Claims Making Dispute Non-Arbitrable Is For Arbitral Tribunal To Adjudicate Upon, Not Courts At Section 11 Stage: Delhi High Court

Case Title: PayU Payments Private Limited v. The New India Assurance Co Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1113

The Delhi High Court, following the law laid down in SBI General Insurance Co Ltd v. Krish Spinning, has held that the aspects of non-arbitrability of a claim are for the arbitral tribunal to adjudicate, and courts at Section 11 stage cannot examine the same.

While Adjudicating On Challenges Against Arbitral Tribunals' Orders U/S 17 Of A&C Act, Court Not Strictly Bound By O.38 & O.39 CPC: Delhi HC

Case Title: LAVA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs MINTELLECTUALS LLP

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1114

The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Prateek Jalan has held that in orders passed by the arbitral tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court is not bound by the principles underlying Order XXXVIII and XXXIX of the Civil Procedure Code.

Worshipper Cannot Claim Injunction To Stop Temple Demolition On Govt Land Without Demonstrating Any Personal Interest: Delhi High Court

Case title: Avinesh Kumar vs. Delhi Development Authority And Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1115

The Delhi High Court has observed that a 'worshipper of a temple', who has no personal interest over the temple property, cannot be granted a relief to stop the demolition of the temple built illegally on a land owned by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA).

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Due To Failure Of Arbitrator To Disclose Conflict, Non-Supply Of Documents

Case Title: FLFL TRAVEL RETAIL LUCKNOW PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1116

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has held that the duty of arbitrators of disclosure of any conflicts under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory and continuous throughout the proceedings. The court noted that disclosure must be in writing and a verbal disclosure does not suffice. The court also held that there was a violation of section 18 of the Act as the party has not had an opportunity to consider and respond to submissions on evidence furnished by the opposing party.

St Stephen's PG Seats Allocation: Delhi High Court Holds DU Officials Guilty Of 'Wilful Disobedience'

Case title: St. Stephan College vs. Vikash Gupta And Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1117

The Delhi High Court has found Delhi University (DU) officials to be in "wilful disobedience" of its order, where the DU was directed to allocate proportionate number of PG seats to St. Stephan College.

Legal Internships Do Not Amount To Active Legal Practice: Delhi High Court

Title: UJWAL GHAI v. DELHI HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE (DHCLSC)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1118

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that legal internships undertaken as law students do not amount to “active legal practice” after being enrolled as an advocate.

“Internships undertaken as part of legal education, though valuable in providing practical exposure, do not satisfy the professional experience requirement for practicing law,” Justice Sanjeev Narula observed.

Withholding Bail When Court Deemed It Fit To Release Accused Amounts To Punishment: Delhi High Court

Title: YUDHVEER SINGH YADAV v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INESTIGATION THROUGH SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1119

The Delhi High Court has held that where a Court deems it fit to release an accused on merits, withholding bail amounts to a punishment.

“Therefore, if a Court on merits deems it fit to release an accused on bail, withholding the aforesaid relief will amount to be considered as a punishment,” Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said.

Prosecution, Legal Departments Must Exercise Due Diligence Before Initiating Cases: Delhi High Court On Frivolous Litigation

Title: STATE v. MANPAL & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1120

The Delhi High Court has observed that the prosecution and Delhi Government's Department of Law & Legislative Affairs must exercise due diligence before initiating cases and that legal process must not be misused through frivolous litigation.

Forum Shopping Is Abuse Of Legal Process And Cannot Be Condoned: Delhi High Court

Case title: MICHAEL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. v. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1121

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma has held that forum shopping, i.e., such conduct, where the petitioner attempts to choose a forum favourable to them after having already approached the appropriate forum, is an abuse of legal process and cannot be condoned.

Delhi High Court Stays Decision Of Apex Council Which Altered Result Of 'Legends League' Cricket Match After Being Declared

Case Title: Mriksha Corporation Pvt Ltd v. Absolute Legends Sports Pvt Ltd & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1122

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta, while hearing a Section 9 petition under the A&C Act, has granted interim relief to the petitioner by staying the communication of Event Technical Committee (ETC) and the Apex Council which allowed the result of a cricket match to be altered after the result has been announced.

Article 227 Cannot Be Invoked When Interrogatories & Discoveries Allowed By Tribunal Are Not In Nature Of Fishing Inquiry: Delhi HC

Case Title: M/s Agarwal Associates (Promoters) Limited v. M/s Sharda Developers

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1123

The Delhi High Court has held that the scope of review under Article 227 is extremely narrow; the same cannot be invoked when the interrogatories and discoveries allowed by the tribunal have a co-relation and nexus with the subject matter of the dispute.

Annual Performance Appraisal Report Determining Career Progression Must Be Written By Superior Officers With Impartiality: Delhi High Court

Title: AMIT KUMAR GUPTA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1124

A division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Navin Chawla & Justice Shalinder Kaur, held that annual performance appraisal report determining career progression and promotions must be written by superior officers with objectivity, impartiality, fairness and free from any prejudice.

Delhi High Court Orders Reinstatement Of CISF Officer Dismissed After Alleged Conspiracy Involving Sexual Harassment

Case Name: Satish Kumar vs. Union of India & Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1125

A division bench of Delhi High Court comprising Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Shalinder Kaur ordered the reinstatement of Satish Kumar, a Sub-Inspector (SI) with the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), after finding that his dismissal following accusations of conspiring with a female constable in a sexual harassment case was unjustified. The court re-evaluated the evidence presented in the departmental inquiry due to the unique facts of the case, where the main charge against Kumar was tied to a superior officer who had himself been punished for sexual misconduct.

SC Candidates Holding Different States' Certificate Entitled To Claim Job Reservation In Union Territory, Delhi High Court Reiterates

Case Title: DSSSB and Anr. v. Dinesh Mahawar & Others.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1126

Recently, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain heard a petition impugning the Judgment by Central Administrative Tribunal (“CAT”) which allowed the respondents' Original Applications (“OAs”) and held that the respondents were entitled to be treated as Scheduled Caste candidates based on the certificates held by them, though the certificate was issued outside Delhi.

Labour Court And Registrar Of Cooperative Societies Have Concurrent Jurisdiction For Disputes Relating To Disciplinary Action: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Sunil Kumar Tewatia v Jain Cooperative Bank

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1127

Recently, a Single Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju heard a petition impugning the award passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge. By the Impugned Award, the complaint filed by the Petitioner on the applicability of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was dismissed by the Labour Court, in view of the specific bar as placed by the provisions of Section 70(1)(b) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 [“DCS Act”].

Principle Of Judicial Non-Interference Is Fundamental To Both Domestic & International Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. Rajender and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1128

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that it is well settled that the principle of judicial non-interference in arbitral proceedings is fundamental to both domestic as well as international commercial arbitration and that the Arbitration Act is self contained code. In this case, a petition under section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (Act) was filed seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator.

"Any Objection Regarding Non-Applicability Of MSMED Act Can Be Decided By Arbitral Tribunal U/S 16 Of A&C Act": Delhi High Court

Case Title: Corrtech International Pvt Ltd v. Delhi International Arbitration Center and Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1129

The Delhi High Court division bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gadela, while hearing an appeal, has upheld the order passed by a single-judge bench wherein it was held that the question of whether an entity was an MSME at the relevant time was to determined by the tribunal under section 16 of A&C Act and not the writ court.

Notice U/S 50 NDPS Act 'Not Necessary' For Search Of Bag As It Was Separate From Accused's Person: Delhi High Court

Case title: Emeka Prince Lath vs. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1130

While hearing a bail plea of a man booked for offences under the NDPS Act, the Delhi High Court said that the requirement of Section 50 notice under the NDPS Act would not be "necessary" in respect of the search of a bag which was thrown by the accused in the case, as the bag was separate from the accused's body.

The high court however noted that when the accused's personal search was conducted the provisions of Section 50 had been complied with. For context, Section 50 of the NDPS Act states the conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.

Anganwadi Workers Can Earn From Other Sources As Recompense From Anganwari Work Is Meagre: Delhi High Court

Case Title: GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS versus PARMILA DEVI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1131

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain has held that Anganwadi workers can have a source of additional income apart from Anganwari work. The Bench stated that it is not possible for Anganwadi workers to sustain themselves or their families from the salary earned by them as Anganwari workers and having more sources of income won't be unnatural.

Delhi High Court Grants Compassionate Allowance To Widow Of Dismissed Employee

Title: SMT USHA DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1132

A Division Bench Delhi High Court consisting of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain ruled in favour of Usha Devi, directing the Union of India to grant her compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. This decision overturned the rejection of her plea by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had previously denied her request following the dismissal of her husband from government service.

Personal Information Of Employees Like Service Records, Copies Of Promotion & Financial Benefits Can't Be Disclosed Under RTI Act: Delhi High Court

Title: RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL v. CENTRAL INFOMATION COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1133

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Sanjeev Narula, while deciding writ petition held that the personal information of employees like service records, copies of promotion & financial benefits can't be disclosed under the RTI Act.

Delhi High Court Allows Extension Of Arbitrator's Mandate Despite Post-Expiry Filing U/S 29A Of Arbitration Act

Case title: SWARANJIT SINGH NARULA SECURITY AGENCY v. NTPC LIMITED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1134

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has held that a petition filed under Section 29A of the Act is maintainable even if it is filed after the expiry of the arbitrator's mandate.

Further, the court observed that this question is still pending before the Supreme Court due to a conflict of decisions of different High Courts, the view taken by Delhi High Court has not been stayed.

Continuation Of Criminal Proceedings Will Be Exercise In Futility: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Upon Amicable Settlement

Case title: Hameedullah Akbar@ Faheem Modh Zai vs. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1135

The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against an Afghan national for offences including rape and forgery of valuable security on the ground that the accused and the complainant, a US national, have amicably compromised and the complainant no longer wished to pursue the case.

It stated that the continuation of criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility as even the complainant did not support the prosecution's case.

Delhi High Court Directs BSES To Pay Ex-Gratia Sum Of ₹10 Lakhs To Parents Of Boy Who Died Due To Electrocution

Case title: Devasia Thomas & Anr. vs. Government Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1136

The Delhi High Court has awarded an ex-gratia compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs to the parents of an 18-year-old boy who passed away due to electrocution. It directed the BSES Yamuna Power Ltd to pay compensation to the parents despite finding that the negligence on the part of BSES in maintaining the electric lines could not be prima facie established.

Baseless Allegations Against Arbitrators Must Be Dealt With Strictly, Arbitral Tribunals Can Hold Party In Contempt: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Dalmia Family Office Trust & Anr. vs. Getamber Anand & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1137

The Delhi High Court division bench comprising Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Amit Sharma has held that Arbitral Tribunals have the same power as a Civil Court in dealing with contempt against itself as per sections 17(2) and 27(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court held that baseless allegations against Arbitrators must be dealt with strictly. It observed that the integrity of arbitration cannot be made fragile by giving room to unsubstantiated or speculative allegations against arbitrators.

'Prima Facie Contemptuous': Delhi High Court Orders Take Down Of Wikipedia Page On Pending Defamation Suit By ANI

Title: Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1138

The Delhi High Court has ordered take down of a page on Wikipedia on the pending proceedings about a Rs. 2 crores defamation suit filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI) against the platform.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that adverse comments were made against the single judge on the page which was prima facie contemptuous.

Delhi High Court Seeks BCI's Stand On Attendance Requirements For 5-Year LLB Courses In Suo Moto Case Over Student's Suicide

Title: COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION IN RE: SUICIDE COMMITTED BY SUSHANT ROHILLA, LAW STUDENT OF I.P. UNIVERSITY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1139

The Delhi High Court has recently sought stand of the Legal Education Committee of the Bar Council of India (BCI) regarding the attendance requirements for five year LL.B. degree courses.

A division bench comprising of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma asked the BCI's Legal Education Committee to hold a virtual meeting for finalising its position and directed that an affidavit be filed within two weeks.

Orders Passed U/S 12 Of Guardians And Wards Act Appealable U/S 19 Of Family Courts Act: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1140

A full bench of Delhi High Court has ruled that the orders passed under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act would be appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.

The full bench comprising of Justice Rekha Palli, Justice Jasmeet Singh and Justice Amit Bansal was answering a reference in a minor custody case. The question before the full bench was whether an order passed under Section 12 of the GW Act would be appealable under Section 19 of the FC Act?

Delhi High Court Summons Counselling Centre In-Charge For Failing To Translate Contents Of Settlement In Vernacular Language

Title: SANTOSH KUMAR AND ORS. v. STATE THROUGH SHO PS NEW ASHOK NAGAR AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1141

The Delhi High Court recently summoned the in-charge of counselling centre, Karkardooma Courts, for failing to translate contents of a settlement agreement to the complainant woman in the vernacular language understood by her.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed that though the official language for court proceedings and documentation is English, the concerned authority is duty bound to translate the contents of such documents to a person not well versed with the language.

'OKEY' Is Informal Usage, Slangs Cannot Be Regarded As “Meaningful English Usage”: Delhi High Court

Case Title: STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ANR versus SHUBHAM PAL ANR ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain was considering an academic issue concerning Combined Graduate Level Examination Tier-II, 2023 conducted by the SSC for recruitment to various civil posts.

Delhi High Court Allows Review Petition, Recalls Direction To Respondents To Appoint Petitioner Due To Low Merit

Case Title: GIRRAJ PRASAD GURJAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

A division bench of Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur has allowed a Review Petition filed by the Respondents seeking review of its order directing the Respondent to recall the appointment of a candidate(writ petitioner).

Review was sought on the ground that the candidate had not made his place in the merit list, however, the Single Judge had directed the Respondents to recall his offer of appointment.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Recalculation Of Arbitral Fees, Upholds Separate Fee Calculation For Claims & Counterclaims

Case Title: ICRI CORPORATES PRIVATE LIMITED v. SHOOGLO NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY OMG NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the arbitral tribunal had correctly applied the IVth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in recalculating the fees separately for the claims and counterclaims.

Additionally, the court held that invoking Section 39(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was premature since no award had been made.

'Reasons' To Remit Matter For Fresh Inquiry Need To Be 'Meaningful And Self Speaking', Can't Be Left To Imagination, Delhi High Court

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Versus ANAND MOHAN SHARAN & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain upheld a judgement of the Central Administrative Tribunal stating that the 'reasons' for remitting the matter as is required by Rule 9(1) of the AIS (D & A) Rules need to be meaningful and cannot be left for imagination.

SCN Was 'Gloriously Silent' On Provisions Of GST Act Which Were Allegedly Infringed: Delhi High Court Quashes Order

Case Title: Amir Malik vs. Commissioner of GST

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

Finding that the SCN as well as the final order fails to provide any clue with respect to the provision of the statute which was alleged to have been violated or infringed, the Delhi High Court quashes the SCN & the order of cancellation of GST registration.

Approval By DoE Mandatory For Order Of Dismissal Against Teachers In Private Schools, Ex Post Facto Approval Cannot Sustain In Law, Delhi High Court

Case Title: ASHA RANI GUPTA versus RAVINDERA MEMORIAL PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Justices Sudhir Kumar Jain has recently set aside a teacher's Order of Dismissal from service observing that the ex post facto approval of the Directorate of education in dismissing a teacher from service granted cannot sustain in law as mandated under Section 8(2) of the DSE Act and Rule 120(2) of the DSE Rules.

Ban Imposed U/S 69 Of Partnership Act Has No Application To Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case Title: HARI OM SHARMA v. SAUMAN KUMAR CHATTERJEE & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1193

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that the bar of Section 69 of the Partnership Act does not come within the expression “other proceedings” as used in Section 69(3) of the Partnership Act. Therefore, the ban imposed under Section 69 has no application to the arbitral proceedings.

Case Title: Jeewraj Singh Shekhawat vs. UOI & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1194

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur granted retrospective promotion to an officer in the Central Reserve Police Force who was earlier denied the same. The Petitioner was posted abroad which resulted in him being ineligible due to not falling within the “10 years Group 'A' service” which was a mandatory condition as per the Central Reserve Police Force Group 'A' (General Duty) Officers Recruitment Rules, 2010. Observing that such circumstances were beyond the control of the Petitioner, the Court granted the benefits to the Petitioner.

When Previous Employer Accepts Resignation, New Employer Can't Deny Appointment To Selected Employee : Delhi High Court

Title: MATTHEW JOHNSON DARA v. HINDUSTAN URVARAK AND RASAYAN LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1195

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Jyoti Singh, while deciding writ petition held that if an employee has already been relieved by the previous employer, then the new employer can't deny appointment to employee who has passed the selection process.

Title: Mrs. Sonali v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1198

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation seeking directions on the Delhi Government to enhance the allocated funds of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) Councillors to atleast Rs. 15 Crores for utilization for welfare and civic activities in the national capital.

Delhi HC Closes PIL Against Delhi Tree Authority's Functioning, Says It's For The Authority To Decide If Saplings Should Be Provided To All

Case Title: Rahul Bhardwaj and Anr v. The Govt of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Anr, W.P.(C) 14940/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1199

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court recently closed a Public Interest Litigation (“PIL”) relating to functioning of the Delhi Tree Authority, noting that a Single Judge Bench of the court was already in seisin of the matter.

Delhi High Court Orders Surrender Of Sikh Leader In Ex MLC Trilochan Wazir's Murder Case

Title: STATE (NCT OF DELHI) v. HARPREET SINGH KHALSA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1200

The Delhi High Court has directed surrender of Sikh leader and former President of Jammu and Kashmir State Gurdwara Parbandhak Board, Sudershan Singh Wazir, in relation to the murder case of former National Conference MLC Trilochan Singh Wazir in September 2021.

DUSU Elections: Delhi High Court Allows Counting Of Votes On Or Before Nov 26 Provided All Defacement Is Cleaned Up By Candidates

Title: Prashant Manchanda v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1219

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi University to undertake the process of counting of votes for Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) elections on or before November 26, provided all the sites which were defaced by the contesting candidates are cleaned up and repainted within a week.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said that it is the responsibility of the candidates and the current students of DU to ensure that the next batch get to use the varsity's infrastructure in good and clean condition.

ANI Defamation Suit: Delhi HC Closes Wikipedia's Appeal Following Consent Order, Allows It To Serve Summons To Users Who 'Edited' ANI Page

Case Title: Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1220

The Delhi High Court has closed an appeal filed by Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts Wikipedia platform, against a single judge bench's order directing it to disclose subscriber details of three individuals who edited Asian News International (ANI) Wikipedia page.

Mankind v. Aquakind: Delhi High Court Issues Ex-Parte Interim Injunction Against Sale Of Pharma Products With 'KIND' Formative Trademarks

Case title: Mankind Pharma Limited vs. Aquakind Land LLP & ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1221

The Delhi High Court has issued a temporary injunction in favour of Mankind Pharma Limited, against the sale of its medical and pharmaceutical goods with the trademark 'MANKIND' and 'KIND' formative marks.

Mankind Pharma (plaintiff) is a pharmaceutical company and it has registered the trademark 'MANKIND' for various goods and services. Mankind Pharma also uses several trademarks with the suffix 'KIND' for its pharmaceutical goods.

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Bharat Broadband Network Ltd v. Paramount Communications Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1222

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee affirmed that the Court under section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award, and must only ascertain that the exercise of power by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provision

Inordinate, Unexplained Delay In Passing Award After Conclusion Of Arguments Can Be Ground To Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: HR BUILDERS THROUGH GPA HOLDER V. DELHI AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1223

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that inordinate and unexplained delay in passing an award from the date of the conclusion of the pleadings can be a ground to set it aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. In this case, the award was passed after more than 2 years from the conclusion of the arguments.

Award Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If View Taken By Arbitrator Is A Plausible View: Delhi High Court

Case Title: RUDRA BUILDWELL PVT LTD. v. REALWORTH INDIA PVT LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1224

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that conduct of the parties has to be seen before granting equitable relief for specific performance of the contract. If the conduct of the parties does not demonstrate that the party claiming relief is ready and willing to perform his part of the contract then the relief under the Specific Relief Act cannot be granted. The court in this case refused to set aside the award under section 34 of the Arbitration Act on the ground that the Arbitrator had taken a plausible view based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

Delhi High Court Cancels LOC Against Ashneer Grover, Wife After Quashing Of EOW FIR

Title: ASHNEER GROVER v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1225

The Delhi High Court has ordered cancellation of the look out circular (LOC) issued against former BharatPe Managing Director Ashneer Grover and his wife Madhuri Jain Grover after quashing of Delhi Police's Economic Offences Wing's (EOW) FIR registered last year.

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court

Case Title: N.S. ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. versus THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1226

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that de jure ineligibility to act as an arbitrator can only be waived, after dispute having arisen, by the parties by an express agreement in writing under proviso to section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act. The court further observed that this waiver is different from section 4 of the Act which can be waived even by conduct.

Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Requires Proof Of Actual Loss: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Adani Enterprises Limited vs. Shri Somnath Fabrics Private Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1227

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has upheld the Arbitral Award wherein the Tribunal had ordered a refund of Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) as the petitioner had failed to prove any actual loss. The court, in light of Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act, observed that forfeiture of the EMD requires proof of actual loss.

'Basis For Acquittal Should Be Strictly Looked Into Before Rejection', Delhi High Court Grants Appointment To Candidate As SI

Case Title: MANISH SAINI versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1228

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justices C Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain set aside the Order of the Screening Committee cancelling the appointment of a candidate based on an FIR lodged against him. Despite acquittal, the Screening Committee had cancelled the Petitioner's appointment to the Post of SI. The Bench held that the Screening Committee ought to have gone through the judgement of the Court that acquitted the Petitioner in order to determine the basis on which the Petitioner was acquitted.

Delhi High Court Orders Release Of Life Convict 26 Years After Incarceration, Calls For 'Deeper Consideration' In SRB Decisions

Title: VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1229

The Delhi High Court has ordered release of a murder convict serving life imprisonment 26 years after his incarceration by quashing the decision of Sentence Review Board (SRB) rejecting his plea for premature release by calling it arbitrary, irrational and illogical.

Arbitral Award Without Rationale For Damages Is Ex Facie Contrary To Settled Law, Can Be Set Aside: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s Travel2Agent.com & Ors. vs. M/s Spice Jet Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1230

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has observed that any award of damages, on the touch stone of Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, must be predicated on actual loss suffered. The court set aside the award for not disclosing the rationale for damages and, on this count, held that the award was ex facie contrary to settled law and in manifest disregard of the material/evidence on record.

Multi-Clause Contracts Should Be Interpreted So That A View On Any Particular Clause Doesn't Violate Another Part Of The Contract: Delhi HC

Case Title: GAS AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD versus SAW PIPES LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1231

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhhu Bakhru and Sachin Datta affirmed that the explicit terms of a contract are always the final word with regard to the intention of the parties. The multi-clause contract inter se the parties has, thus, to be understood and interpreted in a manner that any view, on a particular clause of the contract, should not do violence to another part of the contract. In this case, the court while hearing appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act upheld the impugned judgment passed by the court under section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

Delhi High Court Issues Directions To Family Courts For Dissolution Of Muslim Marriage On Basis Of Talaq Nama, Mubarat Agreement, Etc.

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1232

The Delhi High Court has passed directions for guidance of family courts in the national capital while dealing with any petition filed under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act for dissolution of marriage through extra-judicial divorce under the Muslim Personal Law.

A division bench comprising of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee directed that the Family Court, after issuing notice to the respondent, will record the statements of both parties.

Delhi High Court Presumes Man Dead Who Went 'Missing' During COVID-19 From LNJP Hospital, Grants ₹5 Lakh Compensation To Wife

Title: SMT. REENA DEVI v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1233

Presuming a man dead who purportedly went missing during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic from Lok Nayak Jai Prakash (LNJP Hospital, the Delhi High Court has recently granted Rs. 5 lakh ex-gratia compensation to his wife.

Scope Of Examination U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Confined To Existence Of Arbitration Agreement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SURESH KUMAR KAKKAR & ANR versus M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1234

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that when a non-signatory person or entity is arrayed as a party at Section 8 or Section 11 stage of the Arbitration Act, the referral court should prima facie determine the validity or existence of the arbitration agreement, as the case may be, and complex issue like whether the non-signatory is bound by the arbitration agreement must be left for the Arbitral Tribunal to decide.

What Legal Protections Should Be Granted To 'Blacklisted' OCI Cardholders Allegedly Involved In Anti-National Activities? Delhi HC Answers

Title: KHALID JAHANGIR QAZI THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MS FARIDA SIDDIQI v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1235

The Delhi High Court has explained the legal protections afforded to Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) cardholders against whom backlisting orders are issued in circumstances involving allegations of anti-national activities against them.

Delhi High Court Denies Relief To Arms Dealer Sanjay Bhandari In Challenge To Fugitive Economic Offender Notice

Case title: Sanjay Bhandari vs. Directorate of Enforcement

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1236

The Delhi High Court has rejected the petition of arms dealer Sanjay Bhandari, accused of tax evasion and money laundering, challenging a Special Court's summoning order in relation to the Enforcement Directorate's declaration of him as a 'Fugitive Economic Offender'.

Time Spent In Bona Fide Proceedings Before Court Without Jurisdiction To Be Excluded When Considering Objection On Limitation In S.11 Plea: Delhi HC

Case Title: JKR Techno Engineers Pvt Ltd v. JMD Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1237

The Delhi High Court bench comprising of Justice Subramonium Prasad, while hearing a Section 11 petition, has held that the petitioner's claim cannot be treated as dead one simply because they spent time on bona fide court proceedings before a court without jurisdiction.

Delhi High Court Rejects Inderpal Gaba's Challenge To NIA Arrest & Remand Over Protest At Indian High Commission In London

Case title: Inder Pal Singh Gaba vs. National Investigation Agency

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1238

The Delhi High Court has rejected the plea to Inder Pal Singh Gaba, allegedly involved in the protest at the High Commission of India, London, United Kingdom, challenging his arrest by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and seeking his release from custody.

Court U/S 45 Of Arbitration Act Must Refer Parties To Arbitration Unless Agreement Is Void Or Inoperative: Delhi High Court

Case Title: BALAJI STEEL TRADE versus FLUDOR BENIN S.A. AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1239

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma affirmed that Section 45 of the Arbitration Act casts a statutory mandate on Courts to refer parties to an arbitration agreement to arbitration. The only limited exception carved in Section 45 is if the Court is of the prima facie opinion that the arbitration agreement is (a) null and void; or (b) in-operative; or (c) incapable of being performed. Unless such grounds are made out, the Court has no discretion but to refer the parties to arbitration.

[Confiscation] No Provision For Waiver Of Show Cause Notice U/S 124 Of Customs Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Ms Shubhangi Gupta v. Commissioner Of Customs & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1240

The Delhi High Court recently came to the rescue of an OCI cardholder whose luxury watch was confiscated by the Customs Department when she landed at IGI Airport, without issuance of any show cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Delhi HC Orders DDA To Pay ₹11 Lakh To Family Of Man Who Died In Balcony Collapse, Flags Structural Failures & Negligence In Maintenance

Title: SMT. PROMILA RASTOGI & ORS v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1241

The Delhi High Court has ordered the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to pay compensation of over Rs. 11 lakh to a woman and her minor sons, after her husband died after a balcony in their DDA flat collapsed 24 years ago.

Justice Dharmesh Sharma pulled up the DDA for negligence and said that it had a "continuing obligation" to ensure the flat infrastructure's "durability and longevity post-allotment".

Mere Breach Of Contract Cannot Constitute Cheating Unless Dishonest Intention Is Shown At Beginning Of Transaction: Delhi High Court

Case title: Raffles Education Corporation Ltd vs. State Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1242

The Delhi High Court has observed that a mere breach of contract does not give rise to criminal prosecution of cheating unless a fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown at the beginning of the transaction.

In doing so the high court upheld the sessions court's order which had quashed the summons issued by the magistrate to the Chairman and MD of educational technology company Educomp and its associated persons in alleged case of cheating.

'Additional Charge Of Deputy Commissioner Does Not Entitle Additional Deputy Commissioner To Pay Scale Of DC', Delhi High Court Reiterates

Case Title: SH. R.S. MEENA versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1243

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justices C Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain dismissed a Petition challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal upholding that the assignment of 'current duty charge' of the Post of DC would not entitle the Petitioner holding the Post of ADC to the pay scale as that of the DC. The Bench reiterated that the Order conferring additional charge on the Petitioner did not formally appoint him to hold full charge of the duties of DC and thus he would not be entitled to the pay-scale of the post he held the additional charge of.

'Opinion Of Dermatologist Cannot Be Ignored', Delhi High Court Directs Fresh Examination Of Candidate By Review Medical Board

Case Title: STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ORS. versus AMAN SINGH

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1244

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justices C Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain upheld the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal that directed the Staff Selection Committee to constitute a fresh Medical Board to re-examine the Respondent for determining whether he was fit for duties or not. The Court held that the Respondent was declared fit by the Dermatologist whose opinion was sought by the Review Medical Board and thus ignoring such opinion and declaring the Respondent unfit was not justified.

Pre-Requirement Of Conciliation Before Invoking Arbitration Can't Prevent Filing Of Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: CENTAURUS GREEN ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED versus RAJSHREE EDUCATIONAL TRUST

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1245

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that pre requirement of conciliation in an arbitration clause before invoking the arbitration cannot be a bar to file an application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act seeking appointment of an Arbitrator.

Delhi High Court Directs RSY News To Take Down Original Videos Of ANI In Copyright Infringement Suit

Title: ANI v. RSY News & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1246

The Delhi High Court has directed RSY News to remove or take down from its YouTube channel the original and copyrighted videos of Asian News International (ANI) in the copyright infringement suit filed by the news agency.

Objections On Capacity Of Party To Initiate Arbitration Must Be Addressed Before Tribunal, Not While Appointing Arbitrator: Delhi HC

Case Title: Kanwar Singh Yadav vs. Delhi Tourism and Transport Development Corporation Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1247

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the objections as regards the capacity of the party to initiate arbitration is an aspect which is necessarily required to be gone into the arbitration proceedings, however, the same could not preclude the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal. The court held that a party may raise appropriate jurisdictional/preliminary objections before the Arbitral Tribunal as regards the maintainability of the arbitration and/or the arbitrability of the claim.

Relief To Gautam Gambhir: Delhi High Court Stays Trial Court Order Overturning His Discharge In Cheating Case

Title: Gautam Gambhir v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1248

The Delhi High Court has stayed a trial court order which directed fresh investigation into the alleged role of former cricketer and current head coach of the Indian cricket team Gautam Gambhir in a cheating case concerning flat buyers.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri stayed the order passed by Rouse Avenue Courts on October 29 overturning the discharge of Gambhir and several others in the matter.

High Court Asks Delhi Police To Prepare Handbook For IOs To Timely Obtain Info Requested From Social Media Platforms

Title: SHABANA v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1249

The Delhi High Court has recently asked the Commissioner of Delhi Police to take steps to prepare a handbook that may be utilised by the Investigating Officers (IOs) for timely furnishing of information requested by them from social media platforms.

A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma noted that in a large number of cases, IOs may not be fully aware of the manner in which information requested can be obtained from the various platforms and sometimes precious time is lost.

Ex-Gratia Payments Discretionary In Nature, Not Matter Of Right: Delhi High Court

Title: SUBATA KHAN v. GNCTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1250

The Delhi High Court has recently held that ex-gratia payments are discretionary in nature and not a matter of right.

“Ex-gratia payments are discretionary and not a matter of right. They are granted as a compassionate gesture in extraordinary circumstances, subject to the specific terms and conditions outlined in the governing policy,” Justice Sanjeev Narula said.

Terrorists Misusing Social Media, Using Journalistic Credentials To Incite Violence Are Factors Considered In Sentencing: Delhi High Court

Title: HINA BASHIR BEIGH v. NIA and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1251

The Delhi High Court has ruled that factors such as misuse of social media platforms by terrorists and using journalistic credentials for publishing magazines to incite violence are factors which cannot be ignored while awarding sentence in terrorist activities related cases.

Develop Comprehensive Action Plan To Address Bomb Threats: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: ARPIT BHARGAVA v. GNCTD & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1252

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to develop a “comprehensive action plan” including a detailed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for addressing bomb threats and related emergencies in the national capital.

Delhi High Court Closes PIL To Adopt Integrated Treatment System Under Allopathy, Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Etc

Title: Aswhini Upadhyay v. Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1253

The Delhi High Court has disposed of a public interest litigation filed by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, seeking adoption of “Indian holistic integrated medicinal system" in India.

It was Upadhyay's case that rather than segregated way of Allopathy, Ayurveda, Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy in order to secure medical treatment, medical education and consequently medical treatment granted to patients should be holistic and should encompass courses of all branches.

Sewage Treatment Plants Not Functioning Well, Releasing Raw Sewage In Yamuna: Delhi High Court

Case Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1254

The Delhi High Court has recently observed its prima facie view that the Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) in the national capital are not functioning as per required norms and are releasing raw sewage in Yamuna river.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora suggested that tamper proof meters must be installed to record operational timings of STPs as well as the electricity consumption.

'Adequate Steps Taken For The Present': High Court Closes PIL To Probe Student Suicides At NLU Delhi

Title: ADITYA SINGH TOMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1255

The Delhi High Court has recently closed a public interest litigation petition seeking constitution of an independent inquiry committee comprising of experts to investigate the causes behind student suicides at National Law University (NLU) Delhi.

Ensure Jan Aushadhi Kendras Are Opened Inside Each Hospital Within Four Weeks: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1256

The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Delhi Government to ensure that Jan Aushadhi Kendras are opened inside each hospital in the national capital within four weeks.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora observed that the convenience of having a Jan Aushadhi Kendra in each hospital for the patients and their caregivers requires no reiteration.

Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence And Substitute Arbitrator's Conclusion: Delhi High Court

Case Title: In-Time Garments Pvt. Ltd. versus HSPS Textile Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1257

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad affirmed that under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act the Court cannot re-appreciate evidence and substitute its own conclusion to the one arrived at by the Arbitrator even though a different conclusion can be arrived at on re-appreciating evidence

Aircel Maxis Case: Delhi High Court Stays Trial Court Proceedings Against P Chidambaram In ED Case

Title: P Chidambaram v. ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1258

The Delhi High Court has stayed the trial court proceedings against senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram in the money laundering case connected to the Aircel Maxis case.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri passed the order while dealing with Chidambaram's plea challenging the trial court order taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against him.

Might Lead To A Scam: Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking MHA To Share Deceased Individuals' Data With LIC For Jeevan Jyoti Scheme Claims

Case title: Aakash Goel vs. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1259

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL that sought to mandate the Ministry of Home Affairs to provide a database of deceased individuals in the country to the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC), so as to enable the family members or nominees of deceased policyholders to claim benefits under the Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana.

Not Necessary For PMLA Special Court To Record Reasons For Cognizance Of ED's Complaint: Delhi High Court

Title: SANJAY AGGARWAL v. ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1260

The Delhi High Court has recently held that it is not necessary for the Special Court under PMLA to record its reasons for taking cognizance of Enforcement Directorate (ED) complaint, unlike a private complaint under CrPC or BNSS.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed that an initial complaint can be filed by ED under Section 44 of the PMLA, even if the investigation is not fully completed.

Money Laundering Accused Can't Be Equated With Murder, Rape Accused: Delhi High Court While Granting Bail In PMLA Case

Title: HARI OM RAI v. ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1261

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday remarked that an accused in a money laundering case cannot be equated with those punishable with death, life imprisonment, ten years or more like offences such as murder, rape or dacoity.

Add 'Grounds Of Arrest' Column In Arrest Memo Forms: High Court Directs Delhi Police

Title: PRANAV KUCKREJA (IN POLICE CUSTODY) v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1262

The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi Police to add a column in the arrest memo forms for recording the 'grounds of arrest' of an accused.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said that a revised arrest memo form or some annexures to be added to ensure effective compliance with Section 50 of Cr.P.C. and the corresponding Section 47 of BNSS, 2023.

Plausible View Taken By Arbitrator Based On Facts Of Case Cannot Be Interfered With U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Netaji Subhash Institute Of Technology Versus M/S Surya Engineers & Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1263

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh affirmed that once an arbitrator has taken a plausible view based on the facts of the case, such a view cannot be interfered with under section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

Delhi High Court Orders DDA, MCD To Demarcate Their Jurisdictions; Asks LG To Consider Conducting Survey

Title: JAMIA ARABIA NIZAMIA WELFARE EDUCATION SOCIETY v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS VICE CHAIRMAN & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1264

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to demarcate their boundaries and jurisdictions in the national capital with precision (longitude and latitude) as far as possible.

Delhi HC Upholds Denial Of Capital Gain Exemption For Property Described In Sale Deed As “Makaan” But Having Brick-Kiln Construction

Case title: Himanshu Garg v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-36 (1)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1265

The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with an ITAT order declining capital gain exemption under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with respect to a property described as “makaan” (house) in the registered sale deed but in actuality having a brick kiln construction.

Delhi High Court Issues Permanent Injunction Against Copyright Infringement Of 'Mirchi' And 'Radio Mirchi' Content

Title: ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK (INDIA) LIMITED v. HTTPS//TUNEINCOM/PODCASTS/ARTS—CULTURE PODCASTS/ BANGLA-SUNDAY-SUSPENSE-P2082186 / AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1266

The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction against unauthorized broadcasting and transmission of audio content owned by Entertainment Network (India) Limited, a radio broadcaster, which owns and operates FM radio stations across the country under the trademarks 'Mirchi', 'Radio Mirchi' and 'Sunday Suspense'.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Against Registration Granted To AIMIM As Political Party

Title: TIRUPATI NARASHIMA MURARI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1267

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking quashing of the registration granted by Election Commission of India (ECI) to All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Musalimeen (AIMIM) as a political party.

Justice Prateek Jalan rejected the plea moved by one Tirupati Narashima Murari who also challenged a circular issued by ECI in 2014 granting recognition to AIMIM as a State level party in the State of Telangana.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Matrix Cellular, Others Accused Of Selling Substandard Oxygen Concentrators During COVID-19

Title: MATRIX CELLULAR INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED AND ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1268

The Delhi High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against Matrix Cellular, its CEO and others accused of selling defective and substandard oxygen concentrators at inflated prices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said that it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings at the stage while investigation is still pending.

Merit Based Review Of Arbitral Award Is Impermissible Under Section 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Dr. R.N. Gupta Technical Educational Society versus M/s Intec Capital Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1269

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Sachin Datta affirmed that the scope of jurisdiction under Section 34 and Section 37 of the Act is not akin to normal appellate jurisdiction. It is well-settled that that a merit based review of an arbitral award involving reappraisal of factual findings is impermissible. The mere possibility of an alternative view on facts or interpretation of the contract does not entitle courts to reverse the findings of the Arbitral Tribunal.

Purpose & Function Of Product Is Relevant For Classification Under 'Customs Tariff' Heading, Not Tech Used In Such Product: Delhi High Court

Case title: Vivo Mobile India Private Limited v. Customs Authority For Advance Rulings & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1270

The Delhi High Court has held that it is not the technology which is used in the product that decides its HSN classification under the Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) for the purposes of Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Victim Has Right To Participate In Trial But Can't Override Public Prosecutor: Delhi High Court

Title: SACHIN KUMAR AGGARWAL v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1271

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that a victim has a right to participate in the criminal proceedings but cannot override the Public Prosecutor who acts as an independent Officer of the Court.

Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the right of participation would always mean right to be heard but the victim's counsel cannot override an argument taken by the Public Prosecutor nor can the victim argue that the Public Prosecutor has made a wrong submission.

No Public Interest In Keeping Information Alive On Internet After Quashing Of FIR: Delhi High Court On Right To Be Forgotten

Title: ABC v. State & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1272

Observing that it is important to balance the right to information of public with an individual's right to privacy, the Delhi High Court has said that no public interest can be served by keeping the information alive on the internet after quashing of criminal proceedings.

Court's Supervisory Role Over Arbitral Proceedings Would Be Determined As Per CPC If No Neutral Location Is Specified: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Srinivasa Construction Corporation Pvt Ltd Versus Irrigation Works Circle, Through Superintendent Engineer District, Uttar Pradesh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1273

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh affirmed that if there is a neutral location specified in the contract data, that location would be the place of arbitration and the court having supervisory jurisdiction over the place would have jurisdiction. If no such location is specified, the provisions of the CPC from sections 16 to 20 would be attracted for determining the supervisory jurisdiction of the court.

Arbitration Clause From Another Contract Can Be Incorporated Into Contract Only By Specific Reference: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Unthinkable Solutions LLP Versus Ejohri Jewels Hub Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1274

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad affirmed that the arbitration clause from another contract can be incorporated into the contract when there is a clear intention that arbitration clause contained in another contract would also be incorporated in the contract by which the disputes would be resolved.

Putting Together Structure Of Plywood Sheets Can't Be Construed As Constructing 'Residential House' For Claiming Capital Gain Exemption: Delhi HC

Case title: Sandeep Hooda v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-7, Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1275

“Putting together a structure of plywood sheets cannot be construed as constructing a residential house,” the Delhi High Court has held.

It thus upheld an ITAT order which disallowed capital gains exemption to the appellant-assessee under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that a mere 'makeshift' structure was raised in the name of residential house.

Transfer Pricing-Assessee's Objections On 'Functional Dissimilarity' Not Adjudicated: Delhi HC Asks TPO To Determine Comparable Entity Afresh

Case title: Sequential Technology International India Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known As Omniglob Information Technologies(India)Pvt.Ltd) v. Addl. CIT, Spcl.Range-7

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1276

The Delhi High Court recently directed a Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to determine afresh the inclusion of a comparable entity with respect to an assessee, this time taking into consideration the latter's objections on 'functional dissimilarity' of the two.

'Shocking State Of Affairs': Delhi High Court Asks Authorities To Remove 'Illegal Activities' At Chandni Chowk Redevelopment Project Area

Case Title: Chandani Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal v. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1277

The Delhi High Court has directed the city authorities to remove the deficiencies and illegal activities at the Chandni Chowk redevelopment project and surrounding areas.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that prima facie, the illegal activities and deficiencies in the area must be attended to and removed by the MCD and Delhi Police in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. The court further asked the concerned DCP as well as DC to remain personally present in court on the next date of hearing.

Delhi High Court Permanently Restrains Two Businessmen From Infringing Trademark Of French Luxury Brand Louis Vuitton

Case title: Louis Vuitton Malletier v/s Abdulkhaliq Abdulkader Chamadia & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1278

The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction in favour of the French luxury brand Louis Vuitton, against trademark infringement and passing off of its products bearing the 'LV' trademark by two businessmen.

Recourse To Section 147 Of Income Tax Act Not Barred In Cases Where Assessing Officer Is Empowered To Proceed U/S 153C: Delhi High Court

Case title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7, Delhi v. Naveen Kumar Gupta

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1279

The Delhi High Court has held that Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 does not by itself preclude an Assessing Officer from reopening assessments under Section 147/148 of the Act, on the basis of information found during a search conducted under Section 132 or requisition made under Section 132A of Act in respect of another person.

Assessing Officer Not Required To Examine Commercial Expediency Of Transaction When Evaluating Assessee's Explanation U/S 68 Of IT Act: Delhi HC

Case title: The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6 v. Nucleus Steel Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1280

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that once an assessee offers explanation about nature and source of a credit transaction standing in its books, the burden of proof to show that such explanation is unsatisfactory shifts on the Assessing Officer.

Award In Which Damages Are Awarded In Absence Of Proven Loss Or Injury Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 On Grounds Of Patent Illegality: Delhi HC

Case Title: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Versus M/s Fiberfill Engineers

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1281

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Sachin Datta has held that awarding damages by Arbitrator in the absence of proven injury or loss qualifies to be a patent illegality under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Such an award is liable to be set aside under section 34.

Case Title: DELHIVERY LIMITED versus STERNE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1305

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that where exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred on a court with respect to matters relating to arbitration, the same shall be construed to be a clear 'contrary indicia' and that the court, upon which exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred, would be the juridical seat of arbitration.

Regional Director Under Companies Act Has No Jurisdiction To Decide Ownership Of Trademark: Delhi High Court In Plea By 'Panchhi Petha'

Case title: Panchhi Petha Store vs. Union Of India & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1306

The Delhi High Court has observed that a Regional Director under the Companies Act when deciding an application under Section 16 of the Companies Act, 2013, has no authority to determine the ownership of a trademark.

Court Which Appointed Arbitrator Has Jurisdiction To Substitute Arbitrator Or Extend Time U/S 29 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: OVINGTON FINANCE PVT. LTD. versus BINDIYA NAGAR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1307

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad held that the term "Court" under Section 29A must mean only to be the Court which has appointed the arbitrator and therefore the Court to extend the time or substitute the arbitrator would only be the Court which has appointed the arbitrator and no other Court.

GST Department Not Empowered To Issue Notices In Name Of Non-Existent Entity Post Amalgamation: Delhi High Court

Case title: HCL Infosystems Ltd. v. Commissioner Of State Tax & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1308

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that neither Section 160 nor Section 87 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 enable the Department to issue notice in the name of an entity which ceased to exist post amalgamation.

Delhi HC Allows Invocation Of Arbitration Clause After 10 Yrs, Says That Scope Of S.11(6) Plea Is Limited To Ascertaining Existence Of Agreement

Case Title: SHRI KR ANAND v. NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1309

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the scope of the present proceedings is confined to ascertaining the existence of the arbitration agreement. Also, the objections raised by the respondent regarding the limitation/jurisdiction would be required to be considered by a duly constituted arbitral tribunal.

Delhi High Court Issues Ex-Parte Ad Interim Injunction To Protect Personality Rights Of Renowned Cardiac Surgeon Dr Devi Shetty

Case title: Dr Devi Prasad Shetty & Anr. vs. Medicine Me & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1310

The Delhi High Court has issued a temporary injunction to protect the personality rights of a well-known cardiac surgeon and chairman of Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd Dr. Devi Prasad Shetty.

'Nation's Harmony Not So Fragile': Delhi HC Grants Interim Protection To Human Rights Activist Nadeem Khan Booked For 'Promoting Enmity'

Title: Nadeem Khan v. State and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1311

The Delhi High Court has granted interim protection from arrest to human rights activist Nadeem Khan who has been booked by the Delhi Police on the charges of promoting enmity and criminal conspiracy after a video went viral on social media.

Supreme Court Judgment In 'Arvind Kejriwal' Requiring ED To Supply 'Reasons To Believe' To Arrestee Cannot Apply Retrospectively: Delhi HC

Title: ARVIND DHAM v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1312

The Delhi High Court has held that the condition of supplying the “reasons to believe” by ED to a person arrested under PMLA as a separate document as per Supreme Court's ruling in Arvind Kejriwal case ought to be applied prospectively.

"Personal Jewellery" Of Person Coming To India Not Subjected To Customs Duty: Delhi High Court

Case title: Saba Simran vs. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1313

The Delhi High Court recently granted relief to a woman whose over 200 gm gold jewellery was confiscated by the Customs on her return from Dubai.

Ambiguity In Court's Order Absolute Defence To Contempt Action: Delhi High Court

Case title: Viterra B.V. vs. Sharp Corp Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1314

The Delhi High Court has observed that in cases of contempt of court, if the court's order or directions are unclear, this can serve as an absolute defence against a contempt action. It stated that the court's directives in relation to which breach or disobedience is alleged should be “clear and unequivocal.”

Collecting Funds In Illegal Way To Commit Scheduled Offence In Future Is Not 'Money Laundering' Under PMLA: Delhi High Court

Title: PARVEZ AHMED v. ED and other connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1315

The Delhi High Court has held that collection of funds in an illegal way to commit a scheduled offence in future is not an offence of money laundering under Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Seeking Comprehensive Probe Into Navjot Singh Sidhu's Cancer Cure Claims

Title: DIVYA RANA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1316

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking comprehensive and scientifically rigorous investigation into the claims of Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu that his wife's Stage 4 cancer was treated through a specific diet plan and Ayurveda.

Expansive Interpretation Of “Last Pay Drawn”; Term Includes CPF Contributions: Delhi High Court

Title: Narinder Paul v. Chief Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1317

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma found the Chief Secretary of GNCTD to be in contempt for not complying with court orders regarding certain Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) contributions. These CPF contributions were for judicial members of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC).

Disturbing Trend Of Exploiting Social Media Platforms To Commit Sexual Crimes Against Minors: Delhi High Court

Title: SAIFUL KHAN v. STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1318

While denying anticipatory bail to a man in a POCSO case, the Delhi High Court has taken note of the “disturbing trend” of exploiting the anonymity and reach of social media platforms to perpetrate sexual crimes against minors.

Compensation Received Under SC/ST Rules Must Be Returned If FIR Quashed Due To Settlement: Delhi High Court

Title: BALBIR MEENA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1319

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that any compensation received under the SC/ST Rules should be returned when the legal proceedings are discontinued due to a settlement.

Foreign National Wearing Personal Jewellery To India Not Subject To Import Duty: Delhi High Court

Case title: Luvleen Maingi v. UoI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1320

The Delhi High Court has held that the jewellery worn to India by a foreign national is not subject to customs duty.

A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja thus declared as illegal the action of the Customs Department, confiscating a Thai national's gold chain and kara.

Delhi Riots: High Court Quashes FIR Against Tahir Hussain, Orders Chargesheet To Be Treated As Supplementary Chargesheet In Similar FIR

Title: TAHIR HUSSAIN v. STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1321

The Delhi High Court has recently quashed an FIR registered against former Aam Aadmi Party Councillor Tahir Hussain in connection with the North-East Delhi riots of 2020.

Convict Without 'Permanent Residential Address In Delhi' Not Barred From Getting Furlough: High Court

Title: RAMINDER SINGH @ HAPPY v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1322

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that a convict without a permanent residential address in the national capital cannot be barred from being granted furlough.

Unnao Rape Case: Delhi High Court Grants Interim Bail To Kuldeep Singh Sengar On Medical Grounds

Title: Kuldeep Singh Senger v. CBI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1323

The Delhi High Court has granted two weeks of interim bail on media grounds to expelled BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar, who was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in Unnao rape case.

Trademark Infringement: Delhi High Court Issues Permanent Injunction In Favour Of Tobacco Company Which Owns 'Marlboro' Cigarettes

Case title: Philip Morris Brands Sarl vs.M/S Rahul Pan Shop & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1324

The Delhi High Court has issued permanent injunction in favour of Philip Morris Brands SARL, an American tobacco company, against trademark and copyright infringement of its cigarette packs.

Delhi High Court Allows Disbursement Of Funds To NSFs For Participation In Events, Training Sportspersons

Title: Rahul Mehra v. Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1325

The Delhi High Court has allowed the Union Government to disburse funds to the National Sports Federations (NSFs) for participation of Indian sportspersons in international events, conduct of national and international events here, training and preparation of athletes.

Delhi HC Awards ₹14 Lakh Costs To 'New Balance' In Trademark Infringement Suit Against Website Selling Counterfeit Products

Title: NEW BALANCE ATHLETICS INC. v. ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1326

The Delhi High Court has recently awarded more than Rs. 14 lakh as costs to sports footwear and apparel brand “New Balance” in a trademark infringement suit filed by it against a rogue website selling counterfeit products.

Delhi High Court Issues Interim Stay Order Against Registration Of “JACK DANIEL'S” Trademark By Another Business Entity

Case title: Jack Daniels Properties, Inc. vs. M/S Manglam Krupa & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1327

In an interim order granted in favour of well known alcohol brand Jack Daniels Properties Inc., the Delhi High Court stayed the registration of the brand's trademark “JACK DANIEL'S” by another entity.

Litigant's Conduct Trying To Protract Proceedings In Industrial Disputes Must Be Deprecated: Delhi High Court Imposes ₹20K Cost On Hospital

Case Title: R B SETH JESSA RAM HOSPITAL BROS v. R B SETH JESSA RAM HOSPITAL WORKMEN UNION

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1328

The Delhi High Court has recently deprecated the conduct of litigants trying to protract proceedings in industrial disputes which involve “extreme disparity of resources available to the rival litigants.”

Laying Down Optical Fibre Cables To Enhance Communication Network For Defence Forces Is Exempt From Service Tax: Delhi High Court

Case title: Telecommunications Consultants India Limited v. UoI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1329

The Delhi High Court recently declared that Telecommunications Consultants India Limited, a central public sector undertaking which secured a Project floated by BSNL for laying down Optical Fibre Cable Network, is exempt from service tax since the service is in the nature of setting up a civil infrastructure so as to benefit the defence forces in having a better communication network.

Foreign Law Degree Holders Have To Pass BCI's Qualifying Exam To Practice In India, Even If They Have Cleared Bridge Course: Delhi HC

Case title: MEHAK OBEROI v/s BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1330

The Delhi High Court has rejected a challenge to the Bar Council of India's (BCI) 2024 notification requiring Indian citizens with foreign law degrees to take a qualifying examination to be eligible for enrolment in India.

Delhi High Court Quashes Rape FIR Citing Misuse Of Section 376 IPC, Says It's Used As Weapon By Some To Unnecessarily Harass Males

Title: SURAJ PARKASH v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1331

The Delhi High Court has recently quashed a rape FIR against a man citing misuse of Section 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, observing that it was a classic example of how an innocent person had faced undue hardships due to misuse of the penal provision.

'No Distinction Between Pro Rata Pension And Pension', Delhi High Court Condones Delay For Shortfall In Qualifying Service

Case Title: SANTOSH KUMAR SAHU vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1332

A Division Bench of Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur observed in a Petition seeking pro rata pension after voluntarily discharging from services in the Indian Air Force.

'Disability Pension Can't Be Denied Merely Because Officer Was Posted At Peace Station Later', Delhi High Court

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus COLONEL BK CHHIMWAL RETIRED IC 390431

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1333

A Division Bench of Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur while dismissing a Petition observed that the disability element of Pension could not be denied to the Respondent merely on the grounds that the Respondent was posted at a peace area.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Claim Of Rs.15 Lakh Awarded By Arbitral Tribunal Due To Lack Of Evidence

Case Title: MOHD AMIN DECEASED THROUGH LRS versus MOHD IQBAL DECEASED THROUGH LRS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1334

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Sachin Datta held that after persuading the Supreme Court to refer the disputes to arbitration, it is not open for the appellant to now question the validity of the reference.

Delhi High Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator In Gas Supply Dispute, Invalidates Previous Arbitration Clause In View Of CORE Judgment

Case Title: INDRAPRASTHA GAS LIMITED vs. M/S CHINTAMANI FOOD AND SNACKS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1335

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has observed that the arbitration agreement which contemplated the appointment of the sole Arbitrator to be made out of a panel of three persons chosen by the petitioner was no longer valid in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Central Organisation for Railway Electrification Vs. ECI SPIC SMO MCML (JV) A Joint Venture Company.

[Arbitration Act] S.2(1)(f) Is Non-Derogable, Applicability Cannot Be Excluded Even By Mutual Consent Of Parties: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Suresh Shah versus Tata Consultancy Services Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1336

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that section 2(1)(f) of the Arbitration Act which defined the International Commercial Arbitration is a non derogable provision and its applicability cannot be excluded even by mutual consent of the parties.

Death Of Unnao Rape Victim's Father: Delhi High Court Grants Interim Bail To Kuldeep Sengar On Medical Grounds

Case Title: Kuldeep Singh Sengar v. CBI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1337

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday (December 10) granted interim bail on medical grounds to expelled BJP leader Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the custodial death case of Unnao rape victim's father.

'Candidates Must Be Given Appropriate And Correct Reasons Behind Their Rejection To Any Post', Delhi High Court

Case Title: SANDEEP KUMAR SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1338

A Division Bench of Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur observed that while rejecting the appointment of the Petitioner, the Respondents should have conveyed the correct reason i.e., falling in the last priority in the Priority List instead of informing him that he had failed in the written examination.

'Petitioner's Voluntary Retirement Could Not Be Cancelled After Being Accepted By Respondents Once', Delhi High Court

Case Title: BAIKUNTHA NATH DAS versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1339

A Division Bench of Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur observed that the Petitioner's voluntary retirement could not have been cancelled after it was accepted in the first place.

Will Cooperate And Continue To Participate In Delhi Police's Investigation: Activist Nadeem Khan To High Court

Title: MOHAMMAD WASIQ NADEEM KHAN v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1340

Human rights activist Nadeem Khan told the Delhi High Court that he will cooperate and continue to participate in Delhi Police's investigation against him in the case alleging that he promoted enmity and hatred.

The court disposed of the pleas filed by Khan and Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) seeking quashing of the FIR registered against the former on November 30. Khan is the National Secretary of the organisation.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Alleging Sexual Harassment Of Women In Indian Film Industry

Title: AJEESH KALATHIL GOPI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1341

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) raising allegations of sexual harassment of women in the Indian film industry.

Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order Against Extortion Threat Of Leaking Niva Bupa Insurance Company's Customer Data

Case title: Niva Bupa Health Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Telegram Fz-Llc & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1342

The Delhi High Court has issued a temporary injunction in favour of Niva Bupa insurance company, restraining unknown defendants from publishing, distributing or disclosing its customers' personal data in a ransomware extortion threat that sought to leak the confidential data.

Delhi High Court Rejects Woman's Plea Claiming To Be Heir Of Bahadur Shah Zafar II, Seeking Possession Of Red Fort

Case Title: SULTANA BEGUM v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1343

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea filed by one Sultana Begum, seeking possession of Red Fort, claiming herself to be the widow of the great grandson of the last Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar II.

Error In Order Passed By Court In Arbitration Proceeding Can Be Corrected Under Sections 152, 153 Of CPC: Delhi High Court

Case Title: ADO INDIA PVT. LTD. versus ATS HOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1344

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh has held that any error in an order passed by the court in the Arbitration Proceedings can be corrected under sections 152 and 153 of the CPC provided prejudice is not caused to the other party.

'Leave Encashment Can't Be Denied Merely Because Chargesheet Was Filed Against Petitioner': Delhi High Court

Case Title: PROF SACHIDANAND SINHA versus JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1345

A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Jyoti Singh held that as per the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, the Petitioner could not be denied the grant of Leave Encashment under Rule 39(3) of the said Rules.

Delhi High Court Disallows Income Tax Dept From Adjusting Stayed Demand Towards Previous Refund Due To Nokia

Case title: Nokia Solutions And Networks India Pvt. Ltd v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1346

Granting relief to telecom equipment company Nokia, the Delhi High Court disallowed the Income Tax Department from adjusting the outstanding demand raised against the company, towards a previous refund due to it.

Delhi High Court Closes Sanjay Hegde's Plea To Restore Twitter Account And Issue Guidelines On Censorship On Social Media

Title: SANJAY R HEGDE v. THE MINISTRY OF ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1347

The Delhi High Court has recently closed the plea filed by Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde to restore his suspended twitter account, after it was reinstated in January last year.

'Employee Is Entitled To Medical Reimbursement In Case Of Emergency Even If Hospital Isn't Empanelled Under Any Scheme', Delhi High Court

Case Title: SEEMA MEHTA versus GNCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1348

A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Jyoti Singh held that the Petitioner was entitled to claim medical reimbursement even if the hospital was not the one empanelled under CGHS in case the admission to such hospital was done during an emergency. The Bench held that the Petitioner could not be denied reimbursement as she was severely injured and could not approach the hospitals empanelled under the scheme.

Delhi High Court Orders Implementation Of 'Avlamban Fund Scheme' With ₹10 Crore Corpus To Compensate Acid Attack Victims

Title: PREETI v. STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1349

The Delhi High Court has ordered implementation of Avlamban Fund Scheme, 2024 for victims of acid attack who are residents of the national capital or against whom the offence has been committed here, irrespective of their address.

Delhi High Court Restrains Moti Mahal's Ex-Franchisee From Infringing The Chain's Trademark And Copyright

Case title: Moti Mahal Delux Management Services Pvt. Ltd. & ors. vs. M/S. Srmj Business Promoters Pvt. Ltd. & anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1350

The Delhi High Court has issued a temporary injunction in favour of Moti Mahal Delux Management Services Pvt. Ltd., which owns and operates the popular Moti Mahal restaurant chains in India and various countries, against trademark and copyright infringement by its ex-franchisee engaged in similar business.

If Remedy For Cause Of Action Falls Within Scope Of Arbitration Agreement, Counter Party Cannot Be Compelled To Defend It In A Suit: Delhi HC

Case Title: M/S GRANDSLAM DEVELOPERS PVT LTD v. AKSHAY GANDHI PROPRIETOR OF PRAXIS DESIGN SOLUTIONS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1351

The Delhi High Court Bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that the scope of examination in an application under Section 8 of the Act is limited to prima facie examining the validity and existence of the arbitration agreement.

Delhi High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Litigant For Filing Contempt Plea Against CCI To Stall Authority's Ongoing Investigation Against It

Case title: Forech India Pvt Ltd vs. Shri Inder Pal Singh Bindra Secretary Competition Commission Of India & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1352

The Delhi High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on a company for filing a contempt petition against the Secretary, Competition Commission of India (CCI), which the court described as a 'delaying tactic', to stall an ongoing investigation against the company by the CCI.

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Case Title: M/S SATYADHARA COMMUNICATIONS PVT LTD v. M/S INDIASIGN PVT Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1353

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any plausible reasons for the delay caused in filing the present appeal.

Take Expeditious Steps To Fill Posts Of Non Official Members Of Delhi Mental Health Authority: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: AMIT SAHNI v. GOVT OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1354

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to take expeditious steps for filling up the posts of non-official members of the Delhi Mental Health Authority.

No Pruning Of Trees Till Forest Department Has SOP On Compliance Under DPTA: Delhi High Court

Title: BHAVREEN KANDHARI v. SHRI C. D. SINGH AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1355

The Delhi High Court has directed all the Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCFs) to ensure that no pruning of trees is undertaken till the Department of Forest and Wildlife has guidelines or SOP to ensure that the exercise is done and monitored in accordance with the provisions of Delhi Preservation of Trees Act.

'Sahyog' Portal Developed For Cooperation Of Govts & Social Media Intermediaries In Creating Safe Cyberspace: MHA To Delhi High Court

Title: SHABANA v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1356

The Union Ministry of Home Affairs has recently informed the Delhi High Court that it has developed a portal called “SAHYOG” where authorised agencies of Central Government, States and Union Territories as well as the social media intermediaries will work together to create a safe cyberspace.

PhD Thesis Not Containing Commercially Sensitive, Proprietary Information Not Exempt From Disclosure Under RTI Act: Delhi HC

Case Title: RAJEEV KUMAR v. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION (CIC) THROUGH CPIO & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1357

The Delhi High Court has recently held that PhD thesis which does not contain commercially sensitive or proprietary information is not exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(d) of Right to Information Act. 2005.

Order Rejecting Plea For Extension Of Investigation Period From Initial 90 To 180 Days Under UAPA Appealable, Not Interlocutory: Delhi HC

Title: STATE v. ANAMUL ANSARI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1358

The Delhi High Court has recently held that an order rejecting the application for extension of period of investigation from initial 90 to 180 days under Section 43D(2) of UAPA is an appealable order and not an interlocutory order.

Delhi High Court Quashes ED's Denial Of NOC To Times Of India Group For Overseas Investments

Case title: Times Internet Limited vs. ED & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1359

The Delhi High Court has quashed the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) decision to deny No Objection Certificates (NOC) under Foreign Exchange Management (Overseas Investment) Rules, 2022 to media conglomerates Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd and its subsidiary the Times Internet Limited, the digital venture of the Times of India Group.

Mobile Towers Are Not Immovable Property, They Are Eligible For Input Tax Credit: Delhi High Court Allows Airtel's Plea

Case title: M/S Bharti Airtel Limited v. Commissioner, CGST Appeals-1 Delhi (and batch)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1360

The Delhi High Court has held that mobile/ telecommunication towers are movable properties, eligible for availing input tax credit under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

2020 Delhi Riots: High Court Upholds Order Framing Charges Against Accused, Says 'Evidence Will Be Filtered In The Crucible Of Trial'

Title: SALIM MALIK @ MUNNA v. STATE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1361

The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court order framing charges against one Salim Malik booked in a case related to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Service Tax Not Prima Facie Leviable On Amounts Claimed As Performance Linked Incentives/Commission: Delhi High Court

Case title: Just Click Travels Private Limited v. Union Of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1362

The Delhi High Court has prima facie observed that service tax is not leviable on amounts claimed by an Assessee as commission or performance linked benefit.

Elections To All Bar Associations Shall Be Held On February 07: Delhi High Court

Title: Nitin Kumar Advocate v. Bar Council of Delhi & Ors. and other connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1363

The Delhi High Court has recently ordered that elections to all Bar Associations in the national capital shall be held on February 07, 2025.

Person Arrested U/S 69 CGST Act Must Be Communicated Grounds Of Arrest 'In Writing': Delhi High Court

Case title: Kshitij Ghildiyal v. Director General Of Gst Intelligence, Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1364

The Delhi High Court has held that grounds of arrest must be furnished to a person arrested under Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, 'in writing'.

Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights Of Journalist Rajat Sharma, Orders Take Down Of Deepfake Content

Title: RAJAT SHARMA & ANR v. TAMARA DOC & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1365

The Delhi High Court has protected the personality rights of senior journalist Rajat Sharma and ordered take down of content generated against him through artificial intelligence and deepfake technology.

[Delhi Rent Control Act] Leave To Defend Cannot Be Granted On Mere Asking Of Tenant: Delhi High Court Reiterates

Case title: Satya Pal Pathak Through GPA Vijay Kumar Kaushik

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1366

While quashing a Trial Court's order granting leave to defend to a tenant in an eviction petition, the Delhi High Court has observed that when the landlord placed medical records of his various illnesses and the site plan of premises showed lack of alternate accommodation, the Trial Court should not have considered them as triable issues.

Prima Facie Disturbed Harmony In Society: Delhi HC Refuses To Quash FIR Against DU Professor Over Post Relating To Gyanvapi Mosque

Title: DR. RATAN LAL v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1367

The Delhi High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against Ratan Lal, a professor of history at Delhi University, over a social media post in relation to the controversy regarding Gyanvapi Mosque prima facie observing that he had created disturbance of harmony in the society.

'Resignation During Pendency Of Inquiry Or Investigation Is Generally Not Accepted', Delhi High Court

Case Title: SATYAVIR SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1368

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur while dismissing the Petition of an Army Officer held that resignation during the pendency of inquiry or investigation could generally not be accepted regardless of whether the Petitioner was suspended or not.

Memorandum Of Family Settlement Did Not Require Registration: Delhi High Court Dismisses Appeal U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act

Case Title: SUBHASH CHANDER BAJAJ (SINCE DECEASED) THR LRS & ORS v. INDERJIT BAJAJ (SINCE DECEASED) THR LRS & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1369

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee has held that the Single Judge has, without interfering with the factual findings arrived at by the learned Arbitrator, correctly applied the settled legal position to the MFS, by holding that the same being a record of prior oral partition of the properties between all the sons of late Mr. Amarnath Bajaj, was only a Memorandum regarding the existing settlement between the parties. Moreover, the court held that the Memorandum of Family Settlement (“MFS”) did not require registration.

'Hiring' Of Helicopters By Andaman & Nicobar Admin Not Exigible To Tax Under Central Sales Tax Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: M/S Pawan Hans Limited (Formerly Known As Pawan Hans Helicopters Limited) v. Commissioner Of Trade And Taxes

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1370

The Delhi High Court has held that the supply of helicopters by Pawan Hans Ltd. to the Andaman & Nicobar Islands administration, under an agreement executed in the year 2003, is not exigible to tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

No Reason To Continue Criminal Proceedings If Accused Is Exonerated For Same Charges In Disciplinary Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case title: Ajit Kumar vs. State Nct Of Delhi and Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1371

While quashing a First Information Report (FIR) against an accused, the Delhi High Court reiterated that if an accused is found innocent in disciplinary proceedings and the same charges are levelled in the criminal case, then there is no justifiable reason to continue the criminal proceedings.

CLAT 2025 : Delhi High Court Finds Two Answers 'Demonstrably Wrong', Directs To Revise Results Of Petitioner

Title: ADITYA SINGH (MINOR) v. CONSORTIUM OF NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITIES

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1372

The Delhi High Court has held that the law does not commend a total 'hands off' approach for Courts where the answer key is demonstrably wrong, underscoring that injustice caused to a candidate must be undone.

Whether A Word Or Sentence Would Outrage Woman's Modesty Would Depend On Her Background: Delhi High Court

Title: JASDEEP SINGH & ANR v. STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1373

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that whether a word or sentence outrages a woman's modesty would depend on the background from which she has and the circumstances surrounding her.

Restraining Party From Participating In Any Tender Process U/S 9 of Arbitration Act Will Actually Thwart Competition: Delhi High Court

Case Title: LAS GROUND FORCE PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. v. GOLDAIR HANDLING SA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1374

The Delhi High Court Bench of Chief Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that if the respondent is denied participating in any tender process and ultimately, in the arbitration proceedings and then in the award, it is held that the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, then irreparable loss will be caused to the respondent. The court held that restraining the respondent from participating in the bid will actually thwart competition.

Termination Of Mandate Of Arbitral Tribunal Results In Waste Of Time, Resources And Money, Court Allowed Petition U/S 29A (4) And (5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S RCC INFRAVENTURES LTD & ORS v. M/S DMI FINANCE PVT LTD & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1375

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that the parties and the Arbitral Tribunal have invested a lot of time, effort and energy in the arbitral proceedings. The essence of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is a litigant-centric process to expedite the disposal of cases and reduce the cost of litigation.

Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Former IAS Puja Khedkar

Case Title: Puja Khedkar v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1376

The Delhi High Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail plea filed by former probationer IAS officer Puja Khedkar who is accused of “misrepresenting and falsifying facts" in her application for Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) Civil Services Examination, 2022.

Rape, Acid Attack And POCSO Case Survivors Must Be Provided Free Medical Treatment By All Hospitals: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SV v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1377

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that victims of rape, acid attack and sexual attacks as well as POCSO cases survivors are to be provided free medical treatment in all government and private hospitals and nursing homes.

Delhi High Court Upholds Demolition Of Signature View Apartments, Raps DDA For Substandard Construction

Title: VISHWAJEET SINGH AND ORS v. SH SUBHASISH PANDA and other connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1378

The Delhi High Court has upheld the decision of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for demolition and reconstruction of Signature View Apartments in city's Mukherjee Nagar which was found to be unfit for habitation by structural experts and have been declared as dangerous.

Usage Of 'Separated/Divorced' Can't Be Restricted To Only Those With A Judicial Separation Decree: Delhi High Court

Case title: Deep Minor Through Next Friend vs. Govt. Of NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1379

While hearing a minor boy's plea against non-issuance of Scheduled Caste certificate by the State on the ground that the application could only be accepted if the mother is legally divorced or separated, the Delhi High Court said that the terms like 'separated/ divorced/ single women' cannot be restricted to only those women who have a formal divorce or judicial separation decree.

Award Is Time-Barred U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Due To Petitioner's Failure To Confirm Award Receipt On Affidavit: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S. INDURE PVT. LTD v. ANEJA CONSTRUCTION (INDIA) LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1380

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has affirmed that in absence of any positive affirmation on affidavit from the petitioner as to when the award was received, the Court cannot accept the mere ipse dixit of the petitioner that as soon as the award was received it was filed by the petitioner.

Delhi High Court Issues Interim Order To Protect Trademark Infringement Of HCL's Mark In Healthcare Services

Case title: HCL Corporation Pvt Ltd vs. Healthcare HCL Reference Laboratories & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1381

The Delhi High Court has issued a temporary injunction in favour of HCL Corporation Pvt Ltd–one of the promoter companies of HCL Group of companies–while hearing its plea alleging the trademark infringement of its 'HCL' mark by a company providing healthcare services.

Delhi High Court Directs Family Courts To Complete Witness Cross Examinations Expeditiously Without Embarrassment To Parties

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1382

The Delhi High Court has recently directed all the Family Courts in the national capital to ensure that the cross-examinations of witnesses are completed as expeditiously as possible, without causing any undue harassment or embarrassment to the parties.

Litigant Shifting Responsibility For Inordinate Delay To Counsel's Negligence Is 'Unwholesome': Delhi High Court

Case title: Rahul Mavai vs. Union Of India & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1383

While hearing a writ petition moved after a delay of six years, the Delhi High Court deprecated the practice of litigants seeking condonation of delay merely on the ground that their counsel was negligent or indolent.

[Arbitration Act] Friendly Consultation Necessary Before Issuing Section 21 Notice: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S N. J. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED Versus M/S CAPITALGRAM MARKETING AND TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1384

The Delhi High Court bench of J. C. Hari Shankar has held that in the present case there is no scope for negotiation between the parties, much less friendly negotiations.

Interest Earned On Borrowed Funds Kept For Acquiring Coal Mine Is Not Revenue Receipt If Coal Mine Is Aborted, Borrowings Are Repaid: Delhi HC

Case Title: Pr. CIT vs. International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1385

The Delhi High Court recently accepted that the interest received on borrowed funds, which were temporarily held in interest bearing deposit, is a part of the capital cost and is required to be credited to Capital Work In Progress.

Delhi High Court Bars Non-Advocates From Appearing Before Consumer Courts

Title: ANUJ KUMAR CHAUHAN AND ANR v. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1386

The Delhi High Court has barred the practise of permitting non-Advocates or agents to appear before the Consumer Courts here on the basis of authority letters issued by lawyers, with immediate effect.

Non-Implementation Of PM-ABHIM Scheme In Delhi Unjustified: High Court Orders Signing Of MoU By January 05

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1387

The Delhi High Court has recently ordered signing of an MoU between Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the Delhi Government by January 05, 2025, for implementing PM- Ayushman Bharat Health Infrastructure Mission (PM-ABHIM) scheme in the national capital.

'Rejection Of Disability Pension Should Be Based On Reasoned Order ': Delhi High Court

Case Title: EX U/NVK (ME) PRAVINDERA SHARMA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1388

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur held that since the Petitioner's disabilities arose while he was in service, the possibility of the disabilities having arisen due to being in service could not be ruled out. The Bench further held that the Respondents did not explain as to why they did not consider the opinion of the Medical Board in not granting the disability element of pension to the petitioner and failed to prove the condition for non-entitlement of the Disability Pension to the petitioner.

Not Essential To Arrest Person Who Voluntarily Appears Before Magistrate For Giving Specimen Signature Or Handwriting: Delhi High Court

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1389

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that it is not essential to arrest a person who voluntarily appears before the Court or Magistrate, pursuant to the application filed by the Investigating Officer, for giving specimen signature or handwriting.

Application For Revocation Of Cancellation Of GST Registration Rejected Just Because Taxpayer Did Not Respond To SCN: Delhi HC Revives Application

Case Title: MS Enterprises vs. Sales Tax Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1390

The Delhi High Court held that the application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration could not have been dismissed, when apart from using the phrase “any supporting documents” and “others”, no further reason was assigned as to why the said application was dismissed.

[UAPA] Contemplation Of Terrorist Act For Years Even Without Giving Effect To It Constitutes A Terrorist Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Mohd Abdul Rehman vs. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1391

While hearing an appeal against the conviction of a member of Al-Qaida in Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Delhi High Court has observed that contemplation of a terrorist act for years even if it may be carried out to after several years constitutes a terrorist act.

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To 'Upstox' Against Trademark, Copyright Infringement By Unknown Entities

Case title: MS RKSV Securities India Pvt. Ltd. Upstox vs. John Does And Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1392

The Delhi High Court has in an interim order restrained unknown entities from infringing on the 'UPSTOX' trademarks, work marks and copyrighted photographs–an online trading application owned by RKSV Securities India Pvt. Ltd which is an Indian broking firm providing stock trading opportunities.

Income From Capital Gains On Certain Assets Which Are Excluded U/S 10(38) Of IT Act Must Be Included While Computing Book Profit

Case Title: Principal CIT vs. M/s Hespera Reality Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1393

The Delhi High Court held that proviso to Sec 10(38) cannot be read in reverse to mean that if gains are not included as book profits u/s 115JB, the same are liable to be included as income for purposes of assessment to tax under the normal provisions.

Medical Negligence Not Established By Mere Assertion Of 'Expected Standard Of Care': Delhi High Court

Title: SHIV KUMAR v. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1394

The Delhi High Court has observed that medical negligence cannot be established by mere dissatisfaction or the assertion of an 'expected standard of care', rather it must be demonstrated that the doctor's conduct fell below the level of a reasonably competent practitioner in similar circumstances.