Proceedings Under SARFAESI Act And RDDB Act Are Complimentary, Can Continue Parallelly: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that proceedings under SARFAESI Act and RDDB Act are complimentary to each other and both the proceedings can continue parallelly. The bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that since both the proceedings are complimentary, there would be no application of principle of election of remedies and the...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice On DRT Presiding Officer's Plea Challenging Suspension Due To Allegedly Long Adjournments, Rude Behaviour

The Delhi High Court has issued notice on a plea moved by MM Dhonchak, Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh, challenging his suspension, claiming that the action is illegal, unreasonable and arbitrary.Justice Tushar Rao Gedela sought a response from the Union of India through the Ministry of Finance, department of financial services, within four weeks. Dhonchak...

Thorough Probe In Death Of Man Forced To Sing 'Vande Mataram' During Delhi Riots Must Not Be Delayed Further: Mother To High Court

The mother of a 23 year-old Faizan, who was forced to sing Vande Mataram during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, has told Delhi High Court that a thorough investigation in relation to her son's death brooks “no further delay.”The incident relates to a video that had gone viral on social media wherein Faizan was seen allegedly being beaten by the police, along with four other men, while...

If A Lover Commits Suicide Due To Love Failure, Lady Cannot Be Held For Abetment Of Suicide: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that where a lover commits suicide due to love failure, the lady cannot be held to have abetted the commission of suicide of the man. Justice Amit Mahajan ruled that for the wrong decision taken by a man of weak or frail mentality, another person cannot be blamed as having abetted his committing suicide.“If a lover commits suicide due to love failure, if...

'Central Delhi Court Bar Association' Shall Be Recognized As Court Annexed Bar Association For Rouse Avenue Court: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the Central Delhi Court Bar Association shall be the recognized as the Court annexed Bar Association for the Rouse Avenue District Court Complex in the national capital. “This, we hold is dehors the power of the Bar Council of Delhi to constitute a Bar Association under the Bar Association (Constitution, Recognition & Conduct of Election) Rules,...

Defamation: Delhi High Court Directs Take Down Of Tweets Against Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, Orders YouTube Videos To Be Made Private

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday passed an ad-interim injunction order in favour of Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia in his defamation suit against various YouTube channels and X users for posting allegedly “defamatory content” against him over an assault on him last month during a lawyer's strike at the Gautam Budh Nagar District & Sessions Court.Justice Neena Bansal Krishna disposed...

Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Challenging Dissolution Of Maulana Azad Education Foundation

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea challenging the Union Government's decision to dissolve the Maulana Azad Education Foundation (MAEF) which was set up in 1989 for promoting education among educationally backward minorities.A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna rejected the public interest litigation (PIL) moved by Dr. Syeda...

Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up: April 08 To April 14, 2024

Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 418 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 450NOMINAL INDEXHarish Chandra T & Ors v. ICAI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 418Canara Bank Versus Assistant Commissioner, DGST 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 419Agra Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. Versus Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 420DILIP RAY v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 421M/S. P.M. DIESELS P. LTD v. M/S....

Jurisdiction Of MSEF Council Wrongly Invoked, Time Spent Therein Excluded From Limitation: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that when the jurisdiction of the MSEF Council is wrongly invoked due to uncertainty in law, the time spent before the Council would not be counted while calculating limitation. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act, which exempts the bond fide time spent before the wrong forum, would be given in such...

Notice Of Dispute To MSEF Council Under Section 18 Of MSMED Act Can Be Considered As Notice Of Arbitration Under Section 21 Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a notice given by a party invoking jurisdiction of MSEF Council under Section 18 of the MSMED Act can be considered to be a notice of arbitration required under Section 21 of the A&C Act. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that prior to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation and...

Insistence On Pre-Arbitral Steps Would Be Meaningless When The Respondent Fails To Give Reply To Notices Issued By The Petitioner: Delhi High Court

The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh of Delhi High Court has held that pre-arbitral steps providing for resolution of disputes through mutual talks or through Ombudsman would lose its relevance when a party fails to give reply to notices issued by the other party seeking amicable settlement. Facts The parties entered into a Redistribution Stockist Agreement dated 14.07.2021...

False Implication In Child Abuse Cases More Painful Than Rigours Of Trial And Imprisonment: Delhi High Court

While acquitting a man in a POCSO FIR as there were “serious flaws and gaps” in the prosecution case, the Delhi High Court has observed that a false case of an alleged child abuser suffers a blot to social stigma which is more painful than the rigours of trial and imprisonment. “A child abuser in the eventuality of false implication even continues to suffer a blot of social stigma which...