Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 473 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 506NOMINAL INDEXTHE BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST INDIA v. WWW.FRIENDWITHBOOKS.CO 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 473We, the People of India v. Union of India and Others 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 474Paisalo Digital Limited v. Sat Priya Mehmia Memorial Educational Trust 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 475Paisalo Digital Limited v. Sat Priya Mehmia Memorial Educational Trust...
Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 473 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 506
NOMINAL INDEX
THE BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST INDIA v. WWW.FRIENDWITHBOOKS.CO 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 473
We, the People of India v. Union of India and Others 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 474
Paisalo Digital Limited v. Sat Priya Mehmia Memorial Educational Trust 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 475
Paisalo Digital Limited v. Sat Priya Mehmia Memorial Educational Trust 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 476
Pankaj Singh V. Bashir Ahmed Haroon 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 477
Religare Finvest Limited v. Widescreen Holdings Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 479
ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 480
Samrata Constructions Company v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 481
Religare Finvest Limited v. Widescreen Holdings Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 482
PT PRASADI LAL KAKAJI TEACHER TRAINING COLLEGE v. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 483
SALIM MALIK @ MUNNA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 484
DELHI STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY v. ANNWESHA DEB 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 485
KARAN S THUKRAL v. THE DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 486
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 487
JIWESH KUMAR & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 488
VIKAS BOHAT v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 489
MANMOHAN SINGH & ANR v. SHITAL SINGH & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 490
VAIBHAV v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 491
JAMSHEED ZAHOOR PAUL v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 492
JAI ANANT DEHADRAI v. MAHUA MOITRA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 493
SETARA BIBI v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 494
GAUTAM KUMAR LAHA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 495
AL ISLAM TOUR CORPORATION v. UNION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 496
X v. Y 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 498
Hardy Exploration & Production (India) Inc v. Government of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 497
Vijay Kumar v Union of India & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 499
Kush Kalra v. Union of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 500
Accipiter Investments Aircraft 2 Limited v. Union of India & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 501
SANGHMITRA v. STATE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 502
Heifer Project International v. Heifer Project India Trust 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 503
RAHUL DEV v. STATE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 504
M/S Sunshine Caterers Private Limited Versus Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 505
Director General, Delhi Doordarshan Kendra vs Mohd. Shahbaz Khan and Others 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 506
Delhi High Court Rules In Favour Of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust In ISKCON Copyright Infringement Case
Title: THE BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST INDIA v. WWW.FRIENDWITHBOOKS.CO
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 473
The Delhi High Court has ruled in favour of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, which reproduces the writings and speeches of ISKCON founder Srila Prabhupada, in its suit against a website over copyright infringement.
Justice Anish Dayal decreed the suit against the website www.friendwithbooks.co, which was carrying copies of the books in which copyright vests with the Trust, without any authorization.
Title: We, the People of India v. Union of India and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 474
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking release of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on “extra ordinary interim bail” in all the criminal cases registered by against him, including the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which are pending for inquiry or trial, till completion of his tenure.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said the petition is not maintainable as Kejriwal is in judicial custody and has the means to approach court and file appropriate proceedings.
Case Title: Paisalo Digital Limited v. Sat Priya Mehmia Memorial Educational Trust
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 475
The Delhi High Court has held that assurance given by a party to repay the debts in letter issued to the other party would amount to an acknowledgement of the debt within the meaning of Section 18 of the Limitation Act.
The bench of Justic Prathiba M. Singh held that such an acknowledgement would give rise to a fresh cause of action and the period of limitation would run afresh from the date of such acknowledgement as provided under Section 18 of the Limitation Act.
Case Title: Paisalo Digital Limited v. Sat Priya Mehmia Memorial Educational Trust
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 476
The Delhi High Court has imposed costs of Rs. 5 lakhs on a party that failed to disclose an unfavourable order under SARFAESI Act while seeking interim relief under Section 9 of the A&C Act.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that pendency of proceedings under SARFASI Act is not a bar on initiation of proceedings under A&C Act, however, a party must disclose a fact essential for fair adjudication on the dispute.
Case Title: Pankaj Singh V. Bashir Ahmed Haroon
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 477
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has held that while the court's jurisdiction is limited at the time of making a reference, it is not expected to mechanically refer the dispute to arbitration.
The Court also held that once a party has chosen to file a civil suit to get the disputes resolved, it cannot be permitted to invoke arbitration when the suit fails. The Court also held that arbitration clause in an earlier agreement cannot be invoked if the subsequent agreement does not refer to the previous agreement.
Case Title: Roshan Real Estates Pvt Ltd v. Public Work Development Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 478
The High Court of Delhi has held that the appointment of the arbitrator cannot be called unilateral when the tribunal was constituted pursuant to the consent by the respondent to the appointment from a panel of 5 names.
The Bench of Justice Prathiba M.Singh held that appointment of arbitrator from a panel of 5 names consisting of retired govt. officials would be valid in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Central Organisation for Railways which continues to hold the field despite pending before a larger bench in absence of a stay on the judgment.
Case Title: Religare Finvest Limited v. Widescreen Holdings Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 479
The bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna of Delhi High Court has held that mandate of the arbitrator cannot be terminated when the delay in proceedings was on account of pendency of appeal against the decision of the arbitral tribunal.
The Court held that time consumed in the appeal and the consequent SLP and clarificatory applications cannot be attributed to the arbitral tribunal as a delay in the conduct of arbitral proceedings.
Title: ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 480
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi University (DU) to ensure that henceforth, the allocation or allotment of PG seats in St Stephen's College is not disproportionate.
Justice C Hari Shankar said that while ensuring the allocation, DU may consider the infrastructure available with the concerned College and the number of UG students in that course of study admitted.
Case Title: Samrata Constructions Company v. Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 481
The High Court of Delhi has held that when the arbitral tribunal fails to deal with submissions of a party on a contentious issue, the resultant award would not fulfil the requirements of a reasoned award as required under Section 31 of the A&C Act. It held that the tribunal cannot simply accept unquantified claims without assigning reasons and without dealing with the objections to those claims.
The bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Tara Vitasta Ganju held that once it is found that the agreement has been validly terminated in accordance with the terms of the Contract, it follows that the earnest money is not liable to be refunded.
Case Title: Religare Finvest Limited v. Widescreen Holdings Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 482
The High Court of Delhi has held that a Court exercising powers under Sections 14 & 15 of the A&C Act can extend the mandate of the arbitrator if no ground for its substitution is made out in the application.
The bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that once the Court is satisfied that there is no ground for substitution of the arbitrator, the Court can extend the mandate even without an application under Section 29A(4) of the Act.
Title: PT PRASADI LAL KAKAJI TEACHER TRAINING COLLEGE v. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR and other connected matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 483
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) is a “State” for the purposes of Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India.
Justice C Hari Shankar held that an executive decision taken by the NCTE would also, therefore, constitute “law” for the purposes of Article 19(6).
Title: SALIM MALIK @ MUNNA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 484
The Delhi High Court has denied bail to Salim Malik alias Munna in the case registered under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, alleging a larger conspiracy in the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.
A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain observed that there was enough material on record which clearly indicated that Malik was a co-conspirator and committed the offence for which he was chargesheeted.
Title: DELHI STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY v. ANNWESHA DEB
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 485
The Delhi High Court has held that the appointment of candidates with Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) as a panel lawyer is only professional and not as an employee, and they are not entitled to benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.
A division bench comprising Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Saurabh Banerjee set aside a single-judge order granting maternity benefits to a pregnant woman, who was engaged in contractual employment with Delhi State Legal Services Authority as a panel lawyer.
Case Title: KARAN S THUKRAL v. THE DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE & ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 486
The Delhi High Court has observed that the situation in the record rooms of the District Courts in the national capital is grim and the process of weeding out of the record needs to be carried out expeditiously.
A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said that the process of weeding out needs to be monitored on a regular basis.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 487
The Delhi Police has framed a standard operating procedure (SOP) to be followed by Universities and Colleges while organizing events or festivals for ensuring safety and security of students in general, and female students in particular.
A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora closed a suo motu PIL initiated last year on the issue of “security breaches” particularly in respect of female attendees at various fests organized by colleges or universities in the Delhi-NCR region.
Title: JIWESH KUMAR & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 488
The Delhi High Court has recently observed that the right to obtain a licence as a registered Ayurvedic or Unani medical practitioner vests only in a student who holds a BAMS or BUMS degree.
Justice C Hari Shankar said that prior to obtaining such a degree, the student has no right to practice as a registered medical practitioner.
S.354 IPC: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Against Man, Asks Him To Assist Traffic Police For A Month
Title: VIKAS BOHAT v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 489
Quashing an FIR against a man for outraging modesty of a woman, the Delhi High Court has asked him to assist the Traffic Police at a traffic signal for 30 days.
Justice Navin Chawla quashed the FIR registered for the offences under Sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 509 (word, gesture or act intending to insult modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Title: MANMOHAN SINGH & ANR v. SHITAL SINGH & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 490
The Delhi High Court has observed that a Hindu woman without having her own income has complete rights to enjoy, throughout her lifetime, the property received by her from the deceased husband but cannot have “absolute rights” over it.
“In the case of Hindu women, who may not have their own income, receiving a life estate given to them by their husbands—who may predecease them—is an essential safeguard for their financial security during their lifetime,” Justice Prathiba M Singh said.
Title: VAIBHAV v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 491
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the decision of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) to give 80% quota in the First Year of 3-year B.A. (Hons.) programme in Foreign Languages for the students who passed their class XII examination in the year of seeking admission or the previous year.
The remaining 20% of the seats are given to all other candidates.
Title: JAMSHEED ZAHOOR PAUL v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 492
The Delhi High Court has denied regular bail to a 25 year old Kashmiri man booked under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, observing that he being a supporter of ideology of banned terrorist organization ISIS, arranged illegal weapons and was involved in providing other logistic support to its cadres.
A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain dismissed the bail plea of Jamsheed Zahoor Paul who was arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2018.
Title: JAI ANANT DEHADRAI v. MAHUA MOITRA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 493
Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai has withdrawn from the Delhi High Court his defamation suit against Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra.
Dehadrai had sued Moitra for allegedly making defamatory statements against him on social media as well as print and electronic media.
Title: SETARA BIBI v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 494
The Delhi High Court has ordered expeditious conclusion of the magisterial enquiry into the death of a 32 year old man allegedly in the custody of police officials of Subhash Place police station.
Sheikh Sahadat died on July 23 last year. His wife moved a plea seeking registration of FIR against the erring cops as well as to constitute Special Investigation Team for impartial investigation into the FIR.
Title: GAUTAM KUMAR LAHA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 495
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking issuance of guidelines for release of undertrial prisoners on bail under check of a judicial officer.
A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora rejected the PIL moved by Gautam Kumar Laha, observing that the issue is pending before the Supreme Court and is being supervised there.
Haj Pilgrims Should Only Be Handled By Persons Not Accused Of 'Deceiving' Others: Delhi High Court
Title: AL ISLAM TOUR CORPORATION v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 496
The Delhi High Court has observed that Hajis being very pious pilgrims should be handled only by persons who do not have allegations of swindling or deceiving people on them.
Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the Haj Policy states that the Central Government has the right to debar the Haj Group Organizers (HGOs) against whom complaints have been received and who are involved with the pilgrims.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 498
The Delhi High Court has recently observed that falsely accusing a spouse of being in an extra marital relationship and denying parentage of the children constitutes mental cruelty.
A division bench comprising of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said that repudiation of the matrimonial bond and refusal to accept the children, who are innocent victims in the vile allegations made by the spouse, is nothing but the act of mental cruelty of the gravest kind.
Case Title: Hardy Exploration & Production (India) Inc v. Government of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 497
The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 50,000 cost on Central government for seeking repeated adjournments in a petition for enforcement of an arbitral award, allegedly having a monetary value of over Rs.1100 crores.
The bench of Justice Prateek Jalan noted that the Union had sought another adjournment despite the objections of party seeking enforcement and the assurance given by the Union on last hearing that no further adjournments shall be sought.
Case Title: Vijay Kumar v Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 499
The Delhi High Court recently dismissed a PIL challenging the alleged illegal deputation and subsequent extensions of Uttar Pradesh IAS officer Aunjaneya Kumar Singh.
Singh came to limelight for lodging over 60 FIRs against Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan and his son Abdullah Khan.
Title: Kush Kalra v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 500
The Delhi High Court has directed the Union Ministry of Defence to decide a plea seeking the inclusion of women candidates for recruitment in the Indian Military Academy, Indian Naval Academy and Air Force Academy through the Combined Defence Services (CDS) Examination.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora directed the Union Government to decide the representation filed by Kush Kalra, in accordance with the law within eight weeks.
Go First Case: Delhi High Court Directs DGCA To Process De-Registration Of Leased Aircrafts
Title: Accipiter Investments Aircraft 2 Limited v. Union of India & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 501
The Delhi High Court has passed a slew of directions to de-register 54 aircrafts of various lessors on lease with the crisis-hit airline Go First.
While disposing of a batch of pleas moved by the lessors, Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju set aside the communication letters issued by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) declining to process new registration applications of the lessors.
Title: SANGHMITRA v. STATE
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 502
The Delhi High Court has said that issues such as gender equality and cultural diversity must be made part of the curriculum of the Delhi Judicial Academy, observing that hidden biases are enemies of impartial and equitable judgments.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that judicial education and training, focused not only on legal principles but also on understanding the diverse backgrounds and lived realities of those who come before the court, will go a long way in changing society's stereotypical thinking as it will result in better drafted judgments.
Case Title: Heifer Project International v. Heifer Project India Trust
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 503
The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction in favor of Heifer Project International in a trademark infringement dispute against Heifer Project India Trust.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, presiding over the case, highlighted that it was a clear instance of 'triple identity'.
Tile: RAHUL DEV v. STATE
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 504
The Delhi High Court has granted two weeks parole to a man, convicted in a murder case and sentenced to life, for attending his engagement ceremony and marriage.
Justice Amit Sharma allowed the plea moved by convict Rahul Dev who was convicted in 2014 for the offences under Section 302 (punishment for murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence or giving false information to screen offender) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Case Title: M/S Sunshine Caterers Private Limited Versus Union Of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 505
The Delhi High Court has upheld the disqualification as the CA Certificate did not match details on the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) portal as per the Unique Document Identification Number (UDIN).
The bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has observed that the discrepancy has arisen on account of the non-mention of the certified information by the petitioner's Chartered Accountant in the corresponding UDIN certificate in the field under the heading 'Figures/Particulars'.
Case Title: Director General, Delhi Doordarshan Kendra vs Mohd. Shahbaz Khan and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 506
The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain held that the scope of intervention of the High Court is very limited in matters of factual findings made by Industrial Tribunals unless they were found to be perverse or based on no evidence.