Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 673 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 706NOMINAL INDEXCase Title: Network 18 Media and Investments Limited & Ors v WWW.BrawlersFightClub.Com & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 673Case Title: Sanjeev Goyal v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 674Case Title: M/S Divyam Real Estate Pvt Ltd Vs M/S M2k Entertainment Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 675Case Title: M/S Space 4 Business...
Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 673 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 706
NOMINAL INDEX
Case Title: Network 18 Media and Investments Limited & Ors v WWW.BrawlersFightClub.Com & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 673
Case Title: Sanjeev Goyal v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 674
Case Title: M/S Divyam Real Estate Pvt Ltd Vs M/S M2k Entertainment Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 675
Case Title: M/S Space 4 Business Solution Pvt Ltd Vs The Divisional Commissioner Principal Secretary And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 676
Case Name- Manisha Sharma Vs Vidya Bhawan Girls Senior Secondary School & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 677
Case Title: M/S Kings Chariot Vs Mr. Tarun Wadhwa 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 678
Case Title: Govt Of Nct Of Delhi Vs M/S Dsc Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 679
Case Title: Yc Electric Vehicles Vs Saksham Trading Company 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 680
Case Title: Mohammad Inamul Haq vs. the University Of Delhi & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 681
Title: SADDAM ALI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 682
Title: AMARJEET SINGH DHILLON v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 683
Case Title: Sundaresh Bhat Vs Insolvency And Bankruptcy Board Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 684
Title: AMANDEEP SINGH DHALL v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 685
Title: UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MOSPI v. RAM GOPAL DIXIT 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 686
Case Title: M/S Kld Creation Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd Vs National Highways And Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 687
Title: AAM AADMI PARTY v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 688
Title: YUGANSH MITTAL v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 689
Title: DOMINOS IP HOLDER LLC & ANR. v. M/S MG FOODS & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 690
Case Title: Jagdish Tyres Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indag Rubber Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 691
Case Title: Ms. Sarika Chaturvedi Vs Agarwal Auto Traders & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 692
Case Title: Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd (Tcil) Vs Ngbps Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 693
Case Name- Delhi Transport Corporation Vs Ram Avatar Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 694
Case Title: GE Capital Us Holdings Inc Versus Dy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 696
Case Title: Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) Versus M/S Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 697
Title: ARUN RAMCHANDRAN PILLAI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 698
Title: KULDEEP SINGH SENGAR v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 699
Case Title: Flowmore Limited Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 28, New Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 700
Title: MOHSIN IBRAHIM SAYYED v. NIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 701
Title: SRI SALEK CHAND JAIN v. CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF NCT, DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 702
Case Name- Group 4 Securities Guarding Ltd Vs Secretary, Labour, Govt. of NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 703
Case Title: Glowsun Powergen Private Limited Vs Hammond Power Solutions Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 704
Case: Maya and Ors. v. Union of Indian and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 705
Case Title: HMD Mobile India Private Limited vs Mr Rajan Aggarwal and Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 706
Case Title: Network 18 Media and Investments Limited & Ors v WWW.BrawlersFightClub.Com & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 673
The Delhi High Court has directed the blocking of rogue websites disseminating false information about an interview between Reliance Industries Director Anant Ambani and TV18 journalist Anand Narasimhan.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, presiding over the case, ordered Meta and X to remove the related Facebook posts and tweets and to provide details of the users who made these posts within four weeks.
Case Title: Sanjeev Goyal v. Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 674
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 31 of the Finance Act, 2017. This section amended the Income Tax Act, 1961 (ITA) by adding sub-section (3A) to Section 71. The petition was filed by a government employee who claimed to have constructed a house in 2014, incurring an expenditure of Rs. 1.35 crore.
Case Title: M/S Divyam Real Estate Pvt Ltd Vs M/S M2k Entertainment Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 675
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that where an arbitrator has rendered no clear findings on a contentious issue and the conclusions drawn by an arbitrator are in disregard of the evidence on record, the award is liable to be set aside, as being perverse and patently illegal.
Case Title: M/S Space 4 Business Solution Pvt Ltd Vs The Divisional Commissioner Principal Secretary And Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 676
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that awarding interest rate is the discretion of the arbitrator and the same cannot be claimed by a party as a matter of right.
Principle Of No Work No Pay Not Applicable If Order Of Termination Illegal: Delhi High Court
Case Name- Manisha Sharma Vs Vidya Bhawan Girls Senior Secondary School & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 677
A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela in the case of Manisha Sharma Vs Vidya Bhawan Girls Senior Secondary School & Anr has held that an employee is entitled to backwages if order of termination was illegal and the principle of no work no pay is not applicable in such cases.
Case Title: M/S Kings Chariot Vs Mr. Tarun Wadhwa
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 678
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that where no seat of arbitration is specified in the arbitration agreement, the jurisdiction of the court shall be determined in accordance with Section 16 to Section 20 of C.P.C.
Case Title: Govt Of Nct Of Delhi Vs M/S Dsc Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 679
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that the question of determination of whether indeed, there was a delay on the part of the Contractor is not an excepted matter and it is only the quantum of damages which is non-arbitrable.
Case Title: Yc Electric Vehicles Vs Saksham Trading Company
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 680
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Anish Dayal held that restrained Saksham Trading Company from using 'Yatra', 'YS', and any other marks resembling or deceptively similar to the YC Electric Vehicles marks 'Yatri' and 'YC' in E-Rickshaws, E-Vehicles, parts, accessories, and related goods.
Case Title: Mohammad Inamul Haq vs. the University Of Delhi & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 681
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that the wait-listed candidate will not have any right whatsoever much less the right of consideration. Further, the bench held that once the final select list of candidates has been offered an appointment to the post and concluded by such incumbents accepting the said offer and occupying the said post, the candidate cannot be permitted to challenge it after a passage of more than a year.
Title: SADDAM ALI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 682
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the appointment of Dr. Subhransu Sekhar Acharya, the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of National Small Industries Development Corporation Limited (NSIDC).
Grant Of Statutory Bail Not Interlocutory Order But Final Order: Delhi High Court
Title: AMARJEET SINGH DHILLON v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 683
The Delhi High Court has recently observed that the grant of statutory bail is not an interlocutory order but a final order.
“As far as the maintainability of the Revision Petition is concerned, the grant of Statutory Bail cannot be considered as an Interlocutory Order. It is a final order releasing the Applicant on Bail as the investigation could not be completed and the final report could not be filed within the period of 60/90 days by the prosecution,” Justice Navin Chawla observed.
Case Title: Sundaresh Bhat Vs Insolvency And Bankruptcy Board Of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 684
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad held that official liquidators must adhere to ethical principles and demonstrate an unwavering commitment to fairness to discharge their duties under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Liquor Policy: Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Businessman Amandeep Singh Dhall
Title: AMANDEEP SINGH DHALL v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 685
The Delhi High Court has denied bail to businessman and director of Brindco Sales Private Limited, Amandeep Singh Dhall, in the corruption case connected to the alleged excise policy scam case.
Title: UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MOSPI v. RAM GOPAL DIXIT
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 686
The Delhi High Court has recently observed that the Central Information Commission (CIC) has no jurisdiction to comment upon utilization of funds by the Members of Parliament under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS).
Case Title: M/S Kld Creation Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd Vs National Highways And Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 687
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Amit Bansal held that the role of the court is limited to verifying the existence of a valid arbitration agreement. The bench held that once the court confirms that the arbitration agreement exists, it should refrain from delving into other issues, which are to be decided by the arbitral tribunal.
Title: AAM AADMI PARTY v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 688
The Delhi High Court has directed the Central Government to decide within six weeks Aam Aadmi Party's request for temporary accommodation till a land is allotted to it for construction of permanent office space in the national capital.
Title: YUGANSH MITTAL v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 689
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to decide within four weeks a representation to frame basic norms on fire safety and sprinklers that could be implemented by smaller hospitals and nursing homes in the national capital.
Title: DOMINOS IP HOLDER LLC & ANR. v. M/S MG FOODS & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 690
The Delhi High Court has recently restrained a Punjab based food chain “Donito's” from using the trademark of Domino's for selling pizzas and burgers.
Justice Anish Dayal passed an ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of Domino's pizza group of companies and directed Donito's to take down all references to its device marks in respect of Pizzas and Burgers from its domain www.donito's.in.
Case Title: Jagdish Tyres Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indag Rubber Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 691
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh has held that a party is not permitted to challenge a procedural order passed by an arbitrator under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Case Title: Ms. Sarika Chaturvedi Vs Agarwal Auto Traders & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 692
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh imposed costs of Rs.50,000/- on a party for unnecessarily challenging and questioning the mandate of the arbitrator. The bench held that the party's intent was to create a stale mate. It held that repeated interventions of the court in arbitral proceedings are to be avoided and parties cannot force the arbitrators to recuse/withdraw.
Case Title: Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd (Tcil) Vs Ngbps Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 693
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju held that a general explanation of intra-departmental analysis and discussions doesn't constitute as valid and credible explanation for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Case Name- Delhi Transport Corporation Vs Ram Avatar Sharma
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 694
A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh in the case of Delhi Transport Corporation Vs Ram Avatar Sharma has held that a person not being allowed to be represented by a defence assistant & non-enclosure of past record of the person in chargesheet established that an enquiry proceedings is conducted in violation of principles of natural justice.
Case Title: GE Capital Us Holdings Inc Versus Dy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 696
The Delhi High Court, while quashing the penalty, has held that both under-reporting and misreporting are viewed as separate and distinct misdemeanours.
The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed that, as per Section 270A(1), a person would be liable to be considered to have under-reported their income if the contingencies spoken of in clauses (a) to (g) of Section 270A(2) were attracted. In terms of Section 270A(3), the under-reported income is liable to be computed in accordance with the prescribed stipulations.
Case Title: Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) Versus M/S Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 697
The Delhi High Court has held that exemption is allowable on donations made by one charitable trust to other charitable institutions for a temporary period.
Title: ARUN RAMCHANDRAN PILLAI v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 698
The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court order rejecting the application moved by Hyderabad businessman Arun Ramchandra Pillai, accused in the alleged excise policy scam, against commencement of arguments on charge till conclusion of probe by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Title: KULDEEP SINGH SENGAR v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 699
The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea moved by expelled BJP leader Kuldeep Singh Sengar seeking suspension of his 10 years of sentence in the custodial death of Unnao rape victim's father.
Case Title: Flowmore Limited Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 28, New Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 700
The Delhi High Court has held that the initiation of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act assessment proceedings falling beyond the maximum 10-year block period is unsustainable.
Title: MOHSIN IBRAHIM SAYYED v. NIA
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 701
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea moved by a convict seeking concurrent running of his jail terms in two UAPA cases, observing that the offences committed by him did not form part of the same transaction.
Title: SRI SALEK CHAND JAIN v. CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF NCT, DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 702
The Delhi High Court has recently directed Delhi Government's Chief Secretary to decide within 12 weeks a plea to conduct a door to door survey to collect the data about total number of senior citizens in the national capital.
Case Name- Group 4 Securities Guarding Ltd Vs Secretary, Labour, Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 703
A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh in the case of Group 4 Securities Guarding Ltd Vs Secretary, Labour, Govt. of NCT of Delhi has held that definition of wages under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 cannot be used to calculate bonus under Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.
Case Title: Glowsun Powergen Private Limited Vs Hammond Power Solutions Private Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 704
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not preclude the consideration of applications for extension of the arbitrator's mandate filed after the expiration of the mandate.
Case: Maya and Ors. v. Union of Indian and Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 705
A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh while deciding a writ petition in the case of Maya and Ors. v. Union of Indian and Ors. has held that the Court is to refrain from intervening in cases where there is an effective alternate remedy, unless there exist compelling reasons to do so.
Case Title: HMD Mobile India Private Limited vs Mr Rajan Aggarwal and Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 706
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Anish Dayal held that copyright protection cannot be provided to vague and abstract subjects, merely expressing a generic idea. The bench invalidated the registration of phrases like 'Coming Soon' and generic titles like 'Advertisement', which are commonly available in the public domain.