Delhi High Court Monthly Digest: July 2024 [Citations 734 - 862]

LAKSHMI MURDESHWAR PURI v. SAKET GOKHALE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 734

K Kavitha v. CBI, ED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 735

Bibhav Kumar v. State 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 736

RAKESH YADAV & ORS. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 737

X Corp v. Rajat Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 738

CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 739

CA RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 741

PINTU DAS v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 742

DONGGUAN HUALI INDUSTRIES CO. LTD vs. ANAND AGGARWAL AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 743

ASHOK KUMAR v. STATE & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 744

M/S KG MARKETING INDIA v. MS. RASHI SANTOSH SONI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 745

Social Jurist v. Gnctd & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 747

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -Central -1 Versus Maharaji Education Trust 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 748

DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. ADEEL FEROZE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 749

HARINDERJIT SINGH v. DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE BENCH III THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA & ANR. and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 750

Harsh Dhanuka HUF Versus PCIT 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 752

Aarti Fabricott Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 753

TESLA INC. v. TESLA POWER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 754

MRS. R. v. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 755

SUBLIME SOFTWARE LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 756

HARISH RANA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 757

RAJAN TEWARI v. DURGESH KUMAR PATHAK & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 758

CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 759

Delhi Medical Association & Anr. vs. Govt NCT of Delhi & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 760

Ajay Gautam v. DCPCR & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 762

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. PRADEEP AGGARWAL 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 763

Growth Techno Projects Limited Vs Ishwar Industries Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 764

GUJARAT OPERATIONAL CREDITORS ASSOCIATION v. NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 765

DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LIMITED AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 767

BANTU v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 768

VINOD v. STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 769

SHABNAM BURNEY v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 770

Rajat Sharma v. X Corp & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 771

Deepa Chawla Vs Raheja Developers Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 772

BIBHAV KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 774

New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Versus Union Of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 775

PCIT Versus Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 776

Lily Packers Private Limited Vs Vaishnavi Vijay Umak and connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 777

GJ (JV) Comprising of M/S Godara Construction Company M/S Jandu Construction India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 778

Murari Lal Agarwal Vs Kmc Construction Limited & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 780

M/S Dhawan Box Sheet Containers Pvt Ltd Vs M/S Sel Manufacturing Co Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 781

Nafees Ahmed Vs Delhi Tourism And Transportation Development Corporation Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 782

BPT Infra Project Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indraprastha Ice And Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 783

Reliance Communications Limited Vs Unique Identification Authority Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 784

Deepak Sinha vs. Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 785

Bar Council of Delhi v. Govt. ofN.C.T. of Delhi & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 786

Olive Traders Versus The Commissioner, CGST 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 787

The Deputy Commissioner Of Police Vs Score Information Technologies Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 789

Mr.Rajan Chadha & Anr Vs Mr.Sanjay Arora & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 790

SH. REHAN ELAHI & ANR. v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 791

Welspun Enterprises Ltd Vs Kasthuri Infra Projects Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 792

Sanyam Bhushan vs. State NCT of Delhi & Anr. (CRL.M.C. 1675/2022 & CONNECTED MATTERS) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 794

Aeiforia Constructions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Vs Continental Carbon India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 795

Bimla Sachdev vs. Subur & anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 796

Shri S. Rabban Alam v. CBI Though Its Director 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 797

Indian Railway Catering And Tourism Corporation Ltd. Vs M/S Deepak And Co 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 799

PRINCE v. STATE OF GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 800

ANIL KUMAR HAJELAY & ORS. v. HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 801

SAHIL VIKLANG SAHAYTARTHA SAMITI & ANR. v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 802

AMITA SACHDEVA & ORS. v. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR WOMEN & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 804

M/S Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd Vs Manav Sethi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 805

Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti vs. Delhi Development Authority & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 806

Nishesh Ranjan and Anr. vs Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. and Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 807

M/S Ramacivil India Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 808

M/S Ktc India Pvt. Ltd Vs Randhir Brar & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 809

Gae Projects (P) Ltd. Vs Ge T&D India Ltd. (Formerly Alstom T&D India Ltd.) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 810

DHANYA RAJENDRAN & ANR. v. GALAXY ZOOM INDIA OVT LTD & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 812

CIT Versus A.T. Kearney Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 813

Priyam Sharma vs. State NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 814

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANR v. RAVINA YADAV AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 815

Anjali Birla v. X Corp. and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 817

M/s Ntpc Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Ltd Vs Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 818

Noble Chartering Inc. vs Steel Authority of India Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 819

M/s BPL Limited vs M/s Morgan Securities & Credits Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 820

SH. RITESH KUMAR v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 821

SH SUNNY SACHDEVA v. ACP NORTH RTI CELL AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 823

ABDUL AZIZ v. NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 824

ADIDAS AG v KESHAV TULSIANI AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 825

ANUPAM GAHOI v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 826

RAVI PRAKASH SONI v CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 827

Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited vs Friends Inc. and Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 829

Trans Engineers India Private Limited Vs Otsuka Chemicals (India) Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 830

Vijendra Singh Versus Commissioner Of Customs 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 831

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI v. M/S RAM NIWAS GOEL 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 832

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA & ORS v. NETFLIX ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES INDIA LLP & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 833

SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 835

Simran Kumari v. BCI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 836

TULIR CHARITABLE TRUST v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 837

SD Windlesh v. Union of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 838

The Commissioner Of Income Tax - International Taxation Versus Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 839

IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD vs. BHAVNEET SINGH 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 840

BLOOM INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL v CBSE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 841

Arvind Kejriwal v. Dept of Delhi Prisons & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 842

SAURAV PORWAL & ANR. V. THE STATE & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 843

DR. CHINMAY ANKLESHWARIA vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 844

Samir Malik v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 845

ISHA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 846

LAKSHAY JAISWAL vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 847

Aradhya Export Import Consultants Pvt Ltd Verses Commissioner Of Customs 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 848

RAHUL KUMAR v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 849

CIT(E) Versus NIIT Foundation 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 850

Civil Safety Council of India v. UOI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 851

Resident Doctors Association, AIIMS (Rishikesh) & Ors. v. Ram Kishan Yadav alias Swami Ramdev & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 853

Krishan Kumar & Anr Vs Shakuntla Agency Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 854

Sharad Bhansali & Anr. Vs Mukesh Aggarwal & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 855

RAJATARANGINI INDIA MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. v. SANJAY SHARMA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 856

X v. THE INDIA TODAY GROUP & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 857

Ahluwalia Contracts India Limited Vs Union Of India Through Executive Engineer Cpwd & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 858

JV Creatives Pvt. Ltd. Versus Principal Additional Director General, DGGI, Gurugram Zonal Unit, Gurugram And Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 859

X v. Y 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 860

Pravasi Legal Cell v. Union of India & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 861

OCL Iron and Steel Limited vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 862

Title: LAKSHMI MURDESHWAR PURI v. SAKET GOKHALE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 734

The Delhi High Court has directed All India Trinamool Congress MP Saket Gokhale to pay Rs. 50 lakhs damages to former Indian Assistant Secretary-General to the United Nations, Lakshmi Puri, in her defamation suit against him.

Gokhale in his tweets had referred to a property purchased by Puri in Switzerland and raised questions regarding her and her husband, Union Minister Hardeep Puri's assets. He had also tagged Finance Minister Nirmala Sitaraman in the tweets and sought an ED inquiry.

Delhi High Court Denies Bail To BRS Leader K Kavitha In CBI, ED Cases Relating To Alleged Liquor Policy Scam

Title: K Kavitha v. CBI, ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 735

The Delhi High Court has denied bail to BRS leader K Kavitha in the money laundering and corruption cases related to the alleged liquor policy scam.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma rejected Kavitha's pleas seeking bail in the cases registered by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Bibhav Kumar's Challenge To Arrest In Swati Maliwal Assault Case Maintainable: High Court Issues Notice To Delhi Police

Title: Bibhav Kumar v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 736

The Delhi High Court has accepted the maintainability of a plea filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's aide Bhibhav Kumar challenging his arrest in the alleged Swati Maliwal assault case.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma pronounced the order which was reserved for judgment on May 31. Notice has been issued to the Delhi Police.

Quashing Sexual Violence Cases Based On Monetary Payments Would Imply 'Justice Is For Sale': Delhi High Court

Title: RAKESH YADAV & ORS. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 737

The Delhi High Court has observed that criminal cases involving allegations of sexual violence cannot be quashed on the basis of monetary payments as doing so would imply that “justice is for sale.”

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the observation while rejecting a plea moved by a rape accused seeking quashing of an FIR registered by a woman on the ground that the matter was amicably settled between the parties and that she agreed to settle her claims for Rs. 1.5 lakhs.

'You'll Have To Comply': Delhi HC To X Corp In Appeal Against Single Judge Direction To Remove Tweets Against Journalist Rajat Sharma

Title: X Corp v. Rajat Sharma

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 738

X Corp. (formerly Twitter) has moved the Delhi High Court against a single judge order which directed removal of tweets made by Congress leaders Ragini Nayak, Jairam Ramesh and Pawan Khera alleging that senior journalist Rajat Sharma used abusive language on air during a show on the election result day.

The court, with the consent of both the parties, clarified that the single judge order is an ad interim order and that the injunction application will be taken up by the single judge for hearing and disposal on July 11.

'Needs Medical Help': Delhi High Court Raps Litigant Who Sought Disqualification Of Prime Minister Narendra Modi From Contesting Elections

Title: CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 739

The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal against a single judge order rejecting a plea seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Narendra Modi from contesting the Lok Sabha elections.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela rejected the appeal filed by Captain Deepak Kumar.

Upper Side Of Age Must Be Considered In POCSO Cases Where Victim's Age Is Estimated Through Bone Ossification Test: Delhi High Court

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 740

The Delhi High Court has ruled that in cases under the POCSO Act, the court is required to consider the upper side of the estimated age of the victim where the age of is proved through bone age ossification test.

“In such cases of sexual assault, wherever, the court is called upon to determine the age of victim based on "bone age ossification report", the upper age given in "reference range‟ be considered as age of the victim,” a division bench comprising of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain observed.

SC Collegium's Reasons For Rejecting HC Judges' Appointment If Published, Will Be Detrimental To Those Whose Names Were Recommended: Delhi HC

Title: CA RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 741

The Delhi High Court recently observed that publication of reasons by the Supreme Court Collegium for rejection of the recommendations made by the High Court Collegium for elevation of Judges to the High Court will be detrimental to the interests and standing of people whose names have been recommended by the High Courts.

A division bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan said that the collegium deliberates and decides on the basis of information which is private to the individual being considered.

Judiciary Taking Firm Stand Against Child Sexual Harassment Encourages Victims, Their Families To Report Crimes: Delhi High Court

Title: PINTU DAS v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 742

The Delhi High Court has observed that when the judiciary takes a firm stand against child sexual harassment, it encourages victims and their families to report such crimes and reduces the stigma associated with seeking justice and ensuring that cases are handled with the utmost seriousness.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that victim and victim's family shaming must not be allowed as it will be a deterrent and road block in the real victims reporting such offences to the authorities.

Trademark Registration Does Not Confer Immunity From Challenges, When Allegations Of Passing Off Are Substantiated: Delhi High Court

Case Title: DONGGUAN HUALI INDUSTRIES CO. LTD vs. ANAND AGGARWAL AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 743

Finding that the contents of the plaint sufficiently demonstrate the Plaintiff's rights in the trademark “HUALI”, as well as their prior and extensive use of the same, the Delhi High Court held that the Plaintiff holds the seniority in usage rights of the “HUALI” trademark.

Therefore, the High Court restrained the Defendants from manufacturing, selling, exporting, offering for sale, advertising/ displaying, directly or indirectly, their products under the trademark “HUALI”.

Litigants Keeping Disputes Alive For Malafide Reasons Has Tendency Of Keeping Courts' Docket Heavy: Delhi High Court

Title: ASHOK KUMAR v. STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 744

The Delhi High Court has recently said that the conduct of the litigants to keep the dispute alive for mala fide reasons has the tendency of keeping the docket of the Courts heavy to the detriment of other litigants whose cases have been pending for years.

Justice Amit Mahajan made the observation while quashing two complaints filed in 2016 under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against a man.

Delhi High Court Refers To Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita For First Time While Dealing With Forgery In Trademark Dispute

Title: M/S KG MARKETING INDIA v. MS. RASHI SANTOSH SONI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 745

The Delhi High Court has referred to Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for the first time after it came into effect on July 01, while dealing with the issue of forgery and fabrication of documents by a party in a trademark infringement dispute.

In a ruling passed on July 02, Justice Prathiba M Singh dealt with a suit wherein two newspaper advertisements relied upon by the plaintiff, KG Marketing, were forged and fabricated.

Services Provided By IMG Utilized By BCCI Outside India, Income Not Liable To Be Taxed: Delhi High Court

Case Title: International Management Group (Uk) Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, International Taxation, New Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 746

The Delhi High Court has held that services provided by International Management Group (IMG) are utilized by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) outside India, so the income determined as Fee for Technical Services (FTS) cannot be deemed to accrue in India and therefore cannot be taxed in India.

High Court Appreciates Delhi Govt's DoE For Distributing Textbooks In All Govt Schools

Title: Social Jurist v. Gnctd & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 747

The Delhi High Court has appreciated the Delhi Government's Directorate of Education for complete distribution of textbooks in all the government schools in the national capital.

Accordingly, the court closed the PIL filed by NGO Social Jurist, arguing that students in the MCD schools are being deprived of statutory benefits like uniform, writing material, notebooks etc.

Order Of ITSC Final And Conclusive For AY For Which Application Has Been Filed: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -Central -1 Versus Maharaji Education Trust

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 748

The Delhi High Court has held that the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) is final and conclusive for a particular assessment year (AY) for which the application has been filed.

WhatsApp Conversations Can't Be Read As Evidence Without Mandatory Certificate Under Evidence Act: Delhi High Court

Title: DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. ADEEL FEROZE & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 749

The Delhi High Court has observed that WhatsApp conversations cannot be read as evidence without there being a proper certificate as mandated under the Evidence Act, 1872.

Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with a plea moved by Dell International Services India Private Limited challenging an order passed by the Delhi State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission upholding the District Commission's order refusing to take on record its written statement on the ground that it was filed beyond the period of limitation.

Need To Enhance Disciplinary Mechanisms Against CA Firms, ICAI Must Be Strengthened By Notifying 2022 Amendment Act: Delhi High Court

Title: HARINDERJIT SINGH v. DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE BENCH III THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA & ANR. and other connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 750

The Delhi High Court has observed that there is a need for enhancing and strengthening the disciplinary mechanisms against firms of Chartered Accountants (CAs) as well as to enhance the accountability and transparency of such firms.

Justice Prathiba M Singh said there is an imminent need for strengthening the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) by expeditiously notifying the amendments passed by the Chartered Accountants, the Cost and Works Accountants and the Company Secretaries (Amendment) Act, 2022.

Prepare And Notify Code Of Conduct To Regulate Patent And Trademark Agents Within 6 Months: Delhi High Court To CGPDTM

Title: SAURAV CHAUDHARY v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 751

The Delhi High Court has asked the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks (CGPDTM) to prepare a draft Code of Conduct to regulate Patent and Trademark Agents and to put it on its website within two months for stakeholder consultation.

Justice Prathiba M Singh directed that the Code of Conduct be then notified within six months and latest by December 31.

ITSC Empowered To Make Income Tax Addition: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Harsh Dhanuka HUF Versus PCIT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 752

The Delhi High Court has held that the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) does not lack jurisdiction to make an addition, which has also been duly recorded in the terms of settlement.

AO Can't Review Its Own Order: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Aarti Fabricott Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 753

The Delhi High Court has held that the Assessing Officer (AO) cannot review its own order.

The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed in the extract of the impugned corrigendum that no new material has been found by the department, which would warrant reopening the assessment.

Delhi High Court Refers Elon Musk Owned Tesla's Trademark Infringement Suit Against Gurugram-Based 'Tesla Power India' To Mediation

Title: TESLA INC. v. TESLA POWER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 754

The Delhi High Court has referred to mediation the trademark infringement suit filed by Tesla Inc., owned by Elon Musk, against a Gurugram-based company, Tesla Power India Private Limited and its US counterpart.

Medical Professionals Must Offer Expert Opinions Without Fear Of Legal Repercussions In MTP Cases: Delhi High Court

Title: MRS. R. v. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 755

The Delhi High Court has observed that in cases seeking medical termination of pregnancy (MTP), medical professionals in the medical board must offer their expert opinions without fear of legal repercussions.

Justice Sanjeev Narula said that medical professionals must focus on providing the best possible medical guidance in such sensitive matters.

“The Court must therefore before parting emphasise that the opinion of the Medical Board in such cases of termination of pregnancy is of considerable importance for assisting the Courts in arriving at a just order,” the court said.

Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Against Blocking Of 'Briar' Messaging App In Jammu & Kashmir Over Terror Suspicion

Title: SUBLIME SOFTWARE LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 756

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea against the blocking of open-source messaging application “Briar” by the Union Government in Jammu and Kashmir over threat to national security and sovereignty.

Justice Subramonium Prasad rejected the plea moved by Sublime Software Limited which developed the app challenging the Union Government's blocking order.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea To Examine 30-Yr-Old's Health Condition For Administration Of Passive Euthanasia

Title: HARISH RANA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 757

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea moved by a 30 years old man seeking constitution of a Medical Board to examine his health condition for administration of passive euthanasia.

Justice Subramonium Prasad rejected the plea moved by the man who suffered head injuries after falling from the fourth floor of his paying guest house and has been confined to his bed since 2013 due to diffuse axonal injury with Permanent Vegetative state, Quadriplegia with 100% disability.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Reject Plea Challenging Election Of AAP's Durgesh Pathak In Assembly Bypolls 2022

Title: RAJAN TEWARI v. DURGESH KUMAR PATHAK & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 758

The Delhi High Court has refused to reject a plea challenging the election of Aam Aadmi Party leader Durgesh Kumar Pathak in the Assembly by-elections of 2022.

Pathak was declared as a winner from Rajinder Nagar constituency by defeating his nearest rival by a margin of 11,468 votes.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Alleging 'Cartelization' In Air India-Vistara Merger

Title: CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 759

The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed a plea against the merger of Vistara Airlines and Air India Limited over allegations of cartelization and bid rigging.

Justice Sanjeev Narula rejected the plea moved by former Air India Pilot, Captain Deepak Kumar, observing that the allegations are unsubstantiated and not supported by any evidence.

Safety Of Patients, Staff Is Of Paramount Importance: Delhi High Court Directs Inspection Of Nursing Homes For Fire Safety Compliance

Case title: Delhi Medical Association & Anr. vs. Govt NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 760

The Delhi High Court has directed the Directorate General of Health Services, Delhi Fire Service and Delhi Development Authority to form a Joint Committee and immediately inspect the private nursing homes to demine whether they are following fire safety norms or not.

"No Public Interest": Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Seeking Action Against Dalai Lama For Kissing Minor Boy On Lips

Title: CONFEDERATION OF NGOS & ANR. V/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 761

The Delhi High Court has rejected a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking action against Dalai Lama allegedly molesting a boy child by kissing on his lips in February last year.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela took judicial notice of the fact that Dalai Lama has expressed his apology to those who have been offended by his action.

Ensure Publicity Of Child Helpline Number To Deal With Child Begging: Delhi High Court To Authorities

Title: Ajay Gautam v. DCPCR & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 762

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government and the Delhi Police to ensure that publicity is given to the child helpline number 1098 to deal with incidents of child begging in the national capital.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela disposed of a PIL filed by Ajay Gautam seeking requisite steps to eradicate the problem of child beggary and related problems in and around Delhi.

Contempt: Delhi High Court Sentences Man To 'Sit In Court Till Rising', Imposes ₹1 Lakh Fine

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. PRADEEP AGGARWAL

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 763

Holding a man guilty of contempt for filing a writ petition for “personal gain”, the Delhi High Court has sentenced him “remain present in the Court till its rising”.

A division bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma ordered the sentencing considering the man's medical condition, age and the fact that he expressed remorse and apologised for his conduct.

Time From Filing Section 34 Petition To 2015 Amendment Excluded From Limitation Period For Enforcing Arbitral Awards: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Growth Techno Projects Limited Vs Ishwar Industries Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 764

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held the time period starting from the filing of the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act till the amendment to the Arbitration Act in 2015, stands excluded from the counting of the limitation period for the enforcement of the arbitral award.

Delhi High Court Requests NCLAT Chairperson To Examine Viability Of Recording Of Proceedings Before NCLT Benches, NCLAT

Title: GUJARAT OPERATIONAL CREDITORS ASSOCIATION v. NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 765

The Delhi High Court has requested the Chairperson of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to examine the viability of recording of proceedings of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) benches across the country as well as the former.

Non-Custodial Parent Must Have Visitation Rights To Ensure Contact With Child, Joint Parenting A Norm: Delhi High Court

Case title: Amit Sharma vs. Sugandha Sharma

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 766

The Delhi High Court has observed that in custody matters, a parent without the custody of their child is entitled to visitation rights so as to maintain the bond with their child. The Court stated that joint parenting is the norm and emphasised that the best interest of the child needs to be taken into consideration while determining custody.

Delhi High Court Upholds FSSAI Regulation To Enhance Statutory Warning Size On Pan Masala Packages

Title: DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LIMITED AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 767

The Delhi High Court has upheld the Regulation issued by Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) in October 2022 enhancing the size of statutory warning on pan masala packages from 3mm to 50% of front-of-pack of the label.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora dismissed the plea filed by Dharampal Satyapal Limited, licensed manufacturer of Pan Masala brands namely, Rajnigandha, Tansen, and Mastaba.

BNSS Heralds A 'Transformative Era' In Criminal Justice, Promotes Transparent System Aligned With Principles Of Fairness: Delhi High Court

Title: BANTU v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 768

The Delhi High Court has observed that the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which replaced the British-era Code of Criminal Procedure, heralds a transformative era in the criminal justice.

Police Must Commence Investigation Immediately In Missing Children Cases Without Waiting For 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

Title: VINOD v. STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 769

The Delhi High Court has directed all the police stations in the national capital to ensure that there shall be no waiting period for 24 hours to start inquiry or investigation in cases of missing children.

Delhi High Court Directs DDA Vice Chairman To Remove Encroachments, Illegal Construction On Yamuna River Bank

Title: SHABNAM BURNEY v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 770

The Delhi High Court has directed the Vice Chairman of Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to remove all the encroachments and illegal construction on the Yamuna river bank, river bed and drains flowing into the river.

Delhi High Court Directs Congress Leaders To Immediately Delete 'Defamatory Tweets' Against Rajat Sharma

Title: Rajat Sharma v. X Corp & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 771

The Delhi High Court has directed Congress leaders Ragini Nayak, Jairam Ramesh and Pawan Khera to immediately delete “defamatory tweets” against senior journalist Rajat Sharma latest by 7 PM today, in compliance of an interim order passed on June 14.

Arbitration Clauses Require Explicit Reference In Subsequent Agreements: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Deepa Chawla Vs Raheja Developers Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 772

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that for an arbitration clause to be enforceable in subsequent agreements, it must be explicitly referenced within those agreements.

Arbitration Clause In Lease Agreement Invalidated By Subsequent Verbal Agreement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Mukesh Khurana Vs Rahul Chaudhary

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 773

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Jain has held that the arbitration clause in a lease agreement ceases to exist if the lease terminates and a new verbal tenancy agreement is established.

Swati Maliwal Assault Case: Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Accused Bibhav Kumar

Title: SH. BIBHAV KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 774

The Delhi High Court has denied bail to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's close aide Bhibhav Kumar in the alleged Swati Maliwal assault case.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta rejected Kumar's bail plea, observing that though he happens to be only designated as a personal secretary to the Chief Minister but he yields considerable influence.

Loans Extended By NOIDA Is Not Commercial Activity, Eligible For Section 10(46) Exemption: Delhi High Court

Case Title: New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Versus Union Of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 775

The Delhi High Court has held that the loans and advances extended by the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) are not commercial activities and are eligible for exemption under Section 10(46) of the Income Tax Act.

TPO Lacks Jurisdiction To Question Commercial Expediency Or Genuineness Of Need: Delhi High Court

Case Title: PCIT Versus Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 776

The Delhi High Court has held that the statutory authority conferred upon the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) can only extend to an examination of the appropriateness of the method adopted for the purposes of determining arm's length pricing (ALP) or evaluating the enlistment of comparables. However, the TPO would neither be justified nor could it be countenanced to have the jurisdiction to question commercial expediency or genuineness of need.

Disputes Related To Lock-In Periods In Employment Contracts Are Arbitrable: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Lily Packers Private Limited Vs Vaishnavi Vijay Umak and connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 777

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh has held that disputes relating to lock-in periods that apply during the subsistence of employment contracts are arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Arbitrator Panel Restricting Nominee Selection To Railways' Officers and Suggested Names Is Not Valid: Delhi High Court

Case Title: GJ (JV) Comprising of M/S Godara Construction Company M/S Jandu Construction India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 778

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has held that panel comprising of serving or retired officers of Railways not only restricted the party's choice but also compelled it to choose its nominee from amongst four names suggested by the Railways.

Uploading Of Notices By GST Department Under Heading 'Additional Notices' Is Sufficient Service: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Kamla Vohra Versus Sales Tax Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 779

The Delhi High Court has held that the uploading of notices by the GST department under the heading 'additional notices' amounts to sufficient service.

Specific Reference To Arbitration Clause Needed In 'Two-Contract Case' For Incorporation: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Murari Lal Agarwal Vs Kmc Construction Limited & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 780

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has held that in a 'two-contract case', a specific reference to the arbitration clause in an earlier contract is necessary for its incorporation into the main contract between the parties.

A 'two-contract case' refers to a situation where there are two separate contracts involved and the parties seek to incorporate terms, including an arbitration clause, from one contract into another.

Invoices Containing Arbitration Clauses Which Show Mutual Acceptance Are Prima Facie Arbitration Agreement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Dhawan Box Sheet Containers Pvt Ltd Vs M/S Sel Manufacturing Co Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 781

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has held that when parties engage in actions based on invoices containing arbitration clauses, demonstrating mutual acceptance, an arbitration agreement may be inferred directly from those invoices.

Coercion In Disputes Must Be Examined By Arbitral Tribunal, Referral Court's Jurisdiction Limited By Section 11(6A): Delhi High Court

Case Title: Nafees Ahmed Vs Delhi Tourism And Transportation Development Corporation Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 782

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that coercion, or its absence in a dispute is a complex question, purely of fact, which has necessarily to be examined by the arbitral tribunal. The bench held that with the introduction of sub-Section 6(A) in Section 11, the jurisdiction of the referral court is now circumscribed.

Arbitrator Not Required To Provide Detailed Reasons When Granting Request To Summon Witnesses Under Section 27(1) of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: BPT Infra Project Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indraprastha Ice And Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 783

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that while exercising power under Section 27(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to grant a request to summon a witness, the arbitrator is not required to offer detailed reasons when granting such a request.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Reliance Communications' Petition, Upholds Arbitrator's Calculation Of Call Minutes Based on Total Call Seconds

Case Title: Reliance Communications Limited Vs Unique Identification Authority Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 784

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has dismissed a petition filed by Reliance Communications under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 noting that the arbitrator correctly divided the total number of call seconds by 60 to determine the number of call minutes. The bench noted that the company is not entitled to a whole minute if the call lasted only part of a minute.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea To Analyse Electro Homeopathic Prescriptions For Recognition As Alternative Medicine

Case title: Deepak Sinha vs. Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare & Anr. (W.P.(C) 11217/2021)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 785

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition that sought to direct the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia Laboratory, Ministry of Ayush to analyse certain Homeopathic prescriptions, in order to enable the Inter-Departmental Committee of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to decide on the recognition of Electro Homeopathy as an alternative system of medicine.

Water Logging During Monsoon: High Court Orders Joint Inspection Of Bar Council Of Delhi's Office By Civic Authorities

Title: Bar Council of Delhi v. Govt. ofN.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 786

The Delhi High Court has directed the civic authorities in the national capital to conduct a joint inspection of the office of the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD), situated at Siri Fort Institutional Area, over the issue of water logging due to heavy rain in the monsoon season.

GST Registration Cancelled On Allegation Of Non-Existent Entity; Delhi High Court Directs Assessee To Furnish Documents

Case Title: Olive Traders Versus The Commissioner, CGST

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 787

The Delhi High Court has quashed the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration and permitted the petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice, since the only allegation against the petitioner is that it was found to be non-existent.

Aggrieved Third Party Beneficiaries Of Domain Names Cannot Challenge Arbitration Award U/s 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Mukesh Udeshi vs Jindal Steel Power Ltd. and Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 788

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that only parties to an arbitration agreement can challenge the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It was further held that 3rd-party beneficiaries of domain names in India, who are impacted by the arbitral award, lack the standing to challenge the award.

Arbitral Tribunal Can Award Compensation For Breach If Contract Is Incapable Of Specific Performance: Delhi High Court

Case Title: The Deputy Commissioner Of Police Vs Score Information Technologies Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 789

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju has held that the arbitral tribunal may exercise its power to award compensation for breach if a Contract has become incapable of specific performance.

Disobedience Of Interim Measures Due To Insolvency Proceedings Is Not Contempt: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Mr.Rajan Chadha & Anr Vs Mr.Sanjay Arora & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 790

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna has held that disobedience of interim measures granted under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 due to insolvency proceedings does not warrant contempt charges.

Take Steps For Online Registration Of Muslim, Christian Marriages Under Compulsory Marriage Order: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: SH. REHAN ELAHI & ANR. v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 791

The Delhi High Court has recently expressed displeasure with the Delhi Government over its failure to issue administrative instructions, despite a judicial order passed nearly three years ago, regarding online registration of marriages solemnized under Muslim and Christian Personal Laws under the Compulsory Registration of Marriage Order, 2014.

Courts Must Refrain From Interim Orders Once Arbitral Tribunal Is Constituted Unless Urgency Demands: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Welspun Enterprises Ltd Vs Kasthuri Infra Projects Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 792

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that once an Arbitral Tribunal is in place, ordinarily a court should refrain from dealing with the matter even for the purposes of passing interlocutory orders unless the order is demonstrably one which cannot await the application of mind by the Arbitral Tribunal.

Identical Marks For Medicines Could Mislead Customers, Delhi High Court Restrains Rebanta Healthcare From Using Dr Reddys' Registered Trademark

Case Title: Dr Reddys Laboratories Limited vs Rebanta Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 793

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held that using visually and phonetically identical marks for medicines could confuse the general public, especially when the products serve different medical purposes.

Petitions U/S 482 CrPC Filed With Delay Or To Overcome Expired Limitation Of Alternate Remedy Cannot Be Entertained: Delhi High Court

Case title: Sanyam Bhushan vs. State NCT of Delhi & Anr. (CRL.M.C. 1675/2022 & CONNECTED MATTERS)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 794

The Delhi High Court has observed that failure to avail alternate remedy on the ground of ongoing settlement process is not a reason for the court to exercise its discretionary power to quash the complaint cases.

Magistrate's Clear Application of Mind Necessary For Issuance of Summons Under Section 138 Of NI Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Aeiforia Constructions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Vs Continental Carbon India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 795

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani has held that the issuance of summons under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 requires a clear application of mind. The bench held that this application of mind must be evident upon reading the summoning order; the appellate or revisional court should not have to speculate about the considerations of the Magistrate who issued the summons.

Delhi High Court Holds DDA And Its Officials Guilty Of Contempt In Land Allotment Case

Case title: Bimla Sachdev vs. Subur & anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 796

The Delhi High Court has held the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and its officials, the Vice Chairman and the Deputy Director (Land Disposal), to be in contempt of the court's orders in a case relating to land allotment.

Only If Appeal Is 'Pending' Before Enforcement Of BNSS, Can It Be Continued Under CrPC: Delhi High Court's "Possible Interpretation"

Title: Shri S. Rabban Alam v. CBI Though Its Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 797

Giving a “possible interpretation” of Section 531(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the Delhi High Court said that only if an appeal is pending before the new law came into force, can such an appeal be continued under the Cr.P.C.

Moin Qureshi Case: Delhi High Court Upholds PMLA Proceedings Initiated Against Businessman Sathish Babu Sana

Title: SATHISH BABU SANA v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR. and other connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 798

The Delhi High Court has upheld the money laundering proceedings initiated against Businessman Sathish Babu Sana in relation to the PMLA case involving meat exporter Moin Qureshi and other persons.

Arbitrator's Findings As Per Evidence And Testimony Is Not Perverse, No Need To Interfere: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Indian Railway Catering And Tourism Corporation Ltd. Vs M/S Deepak And Co

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 799

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that findings made by an arbitrator which are consistent with the documentary evidence and admissions made during cross-examination are reasonable and not perverse.

FIR Lodged Under IPC But Anticipatory Bail Plea Filed After Enforcement Of New Criminal Laws, Delhi High Court Says BNSS Should Apply

Title: PRINCE v. STATE OF GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 800

The Delhi High Court has observed that procedure with respect to anticipatory bail pleas filed in relation to FIRs lodged prior to enforcement of new criminal laws should be governed by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, if the date of filing such application is on or after July 1, 2024.

High Court Asks Delhi Govt To Implement Hybrid Courts Project On Priority Basis, Says No Cabinet Approval Required

Case Title: ANIL KUMAR HAJELAY & ORS. v. HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 801

The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Delhi Government to expedite grant of financial sanction of Rs. 387 crores and to implement on priority basis the project for having hybrid hearing in the 691 Courts in the national capital.

'High Time To Think What DDA Has Done To Delhi': High Court Expresses Displeasure Over Failure To Beautify District Park

Title: SAHIL VIKLANG SAHAYTARTHA SAMITI & ANR. v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 802

The Delhi High Court has castigated the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for failing to take any time-bound beneficial measures for beautification of a District Park in the national capital, observing there is no proper concrete walking track or multi game courts there.

“Unhesitatingly, it is manifest that the respondent/DDA does not know what to do with this site in question. Is it not high time that the respondent/DDA must ponder over what they have done to this city in terms of providing recreational activities open to all? How they intend to make Delhi a "smart city"?,” Justice Dharmesh Sharma said.

Interim Measures U/s 17 Of Arbitration Act Affecting Third-Party Rights Is Appealable: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Assets Care And Reconstruction Enterprise Limited Vs Domus Greens Private Limited & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 803

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that a third party, whose rights for a registered charge are affected by an arbitral award, can challenge such award under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Delhi High Court Declines PIL Against YouTube Vloggers Uploading Videos Of Women, Minor Girls Without Consent

Title: AMITA SACHDEVA & ORS. v. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR WOMEN & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 804

The Delhi High Court has recently refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking removal of videos of women and minor girls uploaded on YouTube without their consent.

The PIL was withdrawn as the division bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan expressed disinclination to entertain the plea.

Section 11(6) Petition Not Maintainable Without Prior Section 21 Notice In Arbitration Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd Vs Manav Sethi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 805

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that a Section 11(6) petition under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is not maintainable unless it is preceded in the first instance by a Section 21 notice.

Delhi High Court Upholds Demolition Of Shiv Temple Near Yamuna Flood Plains, Says Eco-Sensitive Zone Must Be Protected From Encroachment

Case Title: Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti vs. Delhi Development Authority & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 806

The Delhi High Court upheld the decision of the Single Judge Bench concerning the demolition order issued by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for a Shiv Temple located near Yamuna Flood Plains. The court asserted that as the Yamuna River Floodplain is an eco-sensitive zone, it needs to be protected from encroachments and illegal constructions.

Intention To Arbitrate Must Be Assessed Holistically In Transactions Involving Interlinked Agreements, Even If Some Agreements Lack Explicit Arbitration Clauses: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Nishesh Ranjan and Anr. vs Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. and Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 807

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that in a composite transaction involving multiple interlinked agreements, courts should assess the intention to arbitrate holistically and refer disputes to arbitration even if some agreements lack explicit arbitration clauses.

Decree Holder Not Entitled To Interest For Period Between Deposit of amount and its Release : Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Ramacivil India Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 808

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that the Decree Holder is not entitled to interest on the amount deposited by the Judgment Debtor for the period between the date of deposit and the date of release permitted by the court.

'Subsequent Shareholders' Do Not Qualify As 'Association Or Body of Individuals' Under Section 2(1)(f)(iii) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Ktc India Pvt. Ltd Vs Randhir Brar & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 809

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has held that “subsequent shareholders,” each holding a specific number of shares and having the right to exit the company under defined conditions while undertaking individual rights and obligations, do not qualify as an "association or body of individuals" under Section 2(1)(f)(iii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Arbitrator Must Determine Validity Of Coercion Claims In Settlement Agreements, Termination Of Arbitration Improper: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Gae Projects (P) Ltd. Vs Ge T&D India Ltd. (Formerly Alstom T&D India Ltd.)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 810

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that claims of coercion or economic duress in a settlement agreement require examination by an arbitrator to determine their validity. The bench held that the Arbitrator's summary dismissal of the claimant's plea and the termination of arbitration proceedings without a trial were improper.

Filing Of Pending Application For Compulsory License Does Not Entitle Applicant To Infringe Owner's Copyright: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Phonographic Performance Limited vs Al-Hamd Tradenation

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 811

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna granted an interim injunction against Al-Hamd Tradenation, restraining it from using Phonographic Performance Limited's copy-righted sound recordings. Even though Al-Hamdhad applied for a compulsory license of those recordings which was pending approval, it was not entitled to use Phonographic Performance Limited's sound recordings without obtaining its license by paying the requisite license fee.

Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of 'Defamatory' YouTube Videos, Articles Against Dhanya Rajendran

Title: DHANYA RAJENDRAN & ANR. v. GALAXY ZOOM INDIA OVT LTD & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 812

The Delhi High Court has ordered the removal of YouTube videos and news articles containing “defamatory” statements against The News Minute founder, Dhanya Rajendran, in respect of the “Cutting South” event hosted last year.

Not Permissible For TPO To Engage In Restructuring Of Transaction: Delhi High Court

Case Title: CIT Versus A.T. Kearney Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 813

The Delhi High Court has held that it is not permissible for the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to engage in the restructuring of a transaction.

Concerning That Law Students Are Fighting In Such A Manner: HC Declines Anticipatory Bail To Delhi University Student Accused Of Assaulting Peers

Case title: Priyam Sharma vs. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 814

While refusing anticipatory bail to a law student involved in a fight against other students, the Delhi High Court expressed its dismay at the incident and remarked “It is quite unfortunate that the complainant as well as the petitioner party who are law students have indulged in the fight. It is a matter of great concern that the students of law are fighting in such a manner.”

Re-Examine CCS Rule Denying Maternity Leave To Female Govt Servant Having More Than Two Children: Delhi High Court To Authorities

Title: COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANR v. RAVINA YADAV AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 815

The Delhi High Court has said that it expects the government authorities to re-examine the sustainability of Rule 43 of the CCS(Leave) Rules which denies maternity leave to a female government servant if she has more than two surviving children.

Delhi Riots: High Court Orders CBI Investigation Into Death Of Man Forced To Sing National Anthem

Title: Kismatun v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 816

The Delhi High Court has transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) the investigation into the death of 23 year-old Faizan, who was allegedly forced to sing national anthem during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani allowed the plea moved by Kismatun, Faizan's mother, seeking SIT investigation into her son's death. The plea was filed in 2020.

Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of Social Media Posts Against UPSC Qualification Of Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla's Daughter

Title: Anjali Birla v. X Corp. and Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 817

The Delhi High Court has ordered removal of social media posts against IRPS Officer and Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla's daughter, Anjali Birla, alleging that she cleared UPSC exam in her first attempt by indulging in corrupt practices and misusing her father's position.

Act of God Does Not Justify Retention Of Performance Bank Guarantee Without Suffering Legal Injury: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s Ntpc Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Ltd Vs Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 818

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Amit Bansal has held that a force majeure event specifically an Act of God beyond the control of the concerned party doesn't require retention of performance bank guarantee.

Disputed Contract, Can't Be Challenged U/s 34 Of Arbitration Act Unless finding are Unreasonable: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Noble Chartering Inc. vs Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 819

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju held that the interpretation of a disputed contract falls within the arbitral tribunal's domain and is not subject to challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 unless the interpretation is unreasonable.

Courts Can't Undertake Independent Assessment Of Award In Appeal U/s 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s BPL Limited vs M/s Morgan Securities & Credits Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 820

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma reiterated that while entertaining an arbitration appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, the role of a court is limited to ascertaining whether the exercise of power under Section 34 has exceeded the scope of the provision. In such cases, the High Court held that courts cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award.

Educational Institutions Are Strong Pillars Of Democracy, Can't Be Machines Producing Individuals Chasing Marks Or Degrees: Delhi High Court

Title: SH. RITESH KUMAR v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 821

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that schools, universities and academic institutions are strong pillars of democracy as well as the entire country and are not meant to be machines producing individuals whose aim is only to chase marks, courses or degrees.

Delhi High Court Orders Office Space, E-Library For Public Prosecutors In Each District

Title: Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 822

Observing it is high time to adapt to technological advances, the Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to create digital library for public prosecutors in each district in the national capital.

Information Seeker Has No Locus Standi In Penalty Proceedings Against Public Information Officer U/S 20 Of RTI Act: Delhi High Court

Title: SH SUNNY SACHDEVA v. ACP NORTH RTI CELL AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 823

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that an information seeker has no locus standi in the penalty proceedings initiated against a Public Information Officer, under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Objections On Sunehri Bagh Masjid Removal Will Be Considered As Per Law: NDMC To Delhi High Court

Title: ABDUL AZIZ v. NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 824

The New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) has informed the Delhi High Court that the public objections against the proposed removal of Sunehri Bagh mosque will be considered in accordance with law.

Delhi High Court Rejects Textile Firm's Sindhi Breakdown Of Word "Adidas" To Defend Trademark Infringement Suit

Case title: ADIDAS AG v KESHAV TULSIANI AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 825

The Delhi High Court recently permanently restrained a textile firm and its partners from using the 'Adidas' mark, after the German sports and apparel wear company filed a trademark infringement lawsuit.

Plea To Quash FIR Lodged Under IPC If Filed After July 1 Should Be Governed By BNSS: Delhi High Court

Title: SH. ANUPAM GAHOI v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 826

The Delhi High Court has recently quashed a matrimonial case filed against a husband by his wife in 2018 while treating his plea for quashing of the FIR filed under Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS).

[RTI Act] Delhi HC Denies Son's Plea For Details Of Deceased Father's Bank Locker, Says 'Larger Public Interest' Doesn't Include Individual Interests

Case title: RAVI PRAKASH SONI v CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 827

The Delhi High Court recently dismissed an appeal against a single-judge bench's order upholding the Central Information Commission's (CIC) refusal to grant information to a man pertaining to a bank locker of his deceased father under the Right To Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

Delhi High Court Discharges Man In Contempt Case For Defaming Judges On Social Media, Imposes ₹1 Lakh Fine

Title: SUDHA PRASAD v. UDAY PAL SINGH

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 828

Accepting unconditional apology, the Delhi High Court has discharged a man who was held guilty of criminal contempt of court for posting a video on social media defaming the judges and claiming that they were doing “illegal acts.”

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Injunction To Restrain Friends Inc. From Using 'PETER ENGLAND' Trademark

Case Title: Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited vs Friends Inc. and Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 829

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna granted an interim injunction to restrain Friends Inc., an apparel store, from using the registered trademark “PETER ENGLAND” owned by Aditya Birla Retail and Fashion Limited. It was held that Aditya Birla Retail was likely to suffer irreparable harm in case an injunction was not granted.

Misunderstanding Of Basic Contractual Framework Vitiates Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Trans Engineers India Private Limited Vs Otsuka Chemicals (India) Private Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 830

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that an award with misreading/misunderstanding of the basic contractual framework vitiates it at its root and makes it vulnerable to challenge under Section 34(2)(b)(ii) and 34(2A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Revoking Suspension Of Customs Broker Licence Can't Restrict Dept. From Inquiring For Imposition Of Penalty: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Vijendra Singh Versus Commissioner Of Customs

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 831

The Delhi High Court has held that the revoking suspension of license cannot restrict the customs department from inquiring for imposition of penalty.

Evolve Protocol To Scrutinize Pleadings Before Filing: Delhi High Court To MCD

Title: MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI v. M/S RAM NIWAS GOEL

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 832

The Delhi High Court has directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to evolve a protocol to scrutinize the pleadings and averments before they are filed in courts and ensure that they align with the law of the land.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Netflix Release Of 'Tribhuvan Mishra CA Topper' Show On ICAI's Plea

Title: THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA & ORS v. NETFLIX ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES INDIA LLP & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 833

The Delhi High Court has recently refused to stay the release of “Tribhuvan Mishra CA Topper” show on OTT platform Netflix. In an order passed on July 16, Justice Navin Chawla saw trailer of the show and observed that it did not refer to the profession of Chartered Accountancy in any manner.

Non-Signatories Can Be Included In Arbitration Beyond Group Company Ties: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Rbcl Piletech Infra Vs Bholasingh Jaiprakash Construction Limited & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 834

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held the inclusion of a non-signatory in arbitral proceedings is not solely dependent on the non-signatory being part of the same group of companies as the signatory.

Citing Inability Of Authorities To Prevent Cattle Feeding On Garbage, Delhi HC Orders Shifting Of Dairies Located Near Landfill Site

Case title: SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 835

The Delhi High Court has recently ordered the shifting of the Bhalaswa dairy colony–located near a landfill site, to the Gogha dairy colony within four weeks, after taking note of the “inability of statutory authorities” to prevent cattle from feeding on garbage in the area.

Decide Plea For Payment Of Minimum Stipend To Junior Lawyers Within Six Weeks: Delhi High Court To BCI

Title: Simran Kumari v. BCI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 836

The Delhi High Court has directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to decide within six weeks a representation regarding payment of minimum stipend to junior lawyers hired by advocates and senior advocates.

Delhi HC Refuses To Halt Streaming Of 'To Kill A Tiger' Netflix Documentary In PIL Over 'Disclosure' Of Minor Rape Survivor's Identity

Title: TULIR CHARITABLE TRUST v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 837

The Delhi High Court has refused to stop the streaming of Netflix documentary “To Kill a Tiger" based on the gang-rape of a 13 year old minor victim in a village in Jharkhand.

Ensure Fencing After Removal Of Encroachments Around Yamuna Floodplains: Delhi High Court To DDA Vice Chairman

Title: SD Windlesh v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 838

The Delhi High Court has directed the Vice Chairman of Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to ensure that there is fencing around the Yamuna River floodplains area as and when unauthorised constructions and encroachments are removed to avoid similar incidents in future.

Services Provided Outside To Indian Customers In Connection With Right To Use Of Process Can't Be Taxed : Delhi High Court

Case Title: The Commissioner Of Income Tax - International Taxation Versus Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 839

The Delhi High Court has held that the receipts from Indian customers for services provided outside' Indian Territory in connection with use or right to use of process or equipment by the assessee company cannot be taxed as royalty.

Burden To Prove Administrative Urgency In Cases Relating To Transfer Of Disabled Employee Lies On Employer: Delhi High Court

Case title: IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD vs. BHAVNEET SINGH

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 840

In a case relating to the transfer of a disabled employee, the Delhi High Court has observed that the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 take precedence over any employment and contractual arrangements. The Court stated that disabled employees cannot be transferred unless there is an administrative urgency, with the burden of proving such urgency resting on the employer.

Schools Play Vital Role In Education, Must Ensure Examinee's Documentation Is Completed Within Time: Delhi HC Provides Relief To Class 10, 12 Students

Case Title: BLOOM INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL v CBSE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 841

The Delhi High Court recently directed the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to open its online portal to accommodate 45 class 10th and 12th students studying in a Delhi school to appear in their improvement and compartmental exams.

Delhi HC Permits Arvind Kejriwal Two Additional Meetings With Lawyers, Says 'Special Situations Call For Special Remedies'

Title: Arvind Kejriwal v. Dept of Delhi Prisons & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 842

Observing that special situations call for special remedies, the Delhi High Court has allowed the plea moved by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who is in judicial custody in the alleged liquor policy scam, for granting two additional meetings with his lawyers through virtual conferencing in a week.

Delhi High Court Orders Accused To Do Community Service At Gurudwara, Says Offence Of Outraging Woman's Modesty Can't Be Compromised

Title: SAURAV PORWAL & ANR. V. THE STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 843

While quashing a 2014 case against two men for allegedly assaulting and outraging modesty of a woman after settlement between them, the Delhi High Court has directed them to do community service of one month in the city's Gurudwara Rakab Ganj Sahib.

Incorrect To Deny MD Seat To Candidate Solely Due To Administrative Fault: Delhi High Court To AIIMS

Case title: DR. CHINMAY ANKLESHWARIA vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 844

The Delhi High Court observed that denying a MD seat (Doctor of Medicine) to a candidate solely due to administrative fault and inefficiency would be unjust and against the principle of merit-based selection. The Court asserted that filling available vacancies is in the best interests of public health and institutional efficiency.

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Against Centre's Notification Declaring June 25 As 'Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas'

Title: Samir Malik v. Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 845

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL against a recent notification issued by the Union Government declaring that 25th of June every year be observed as 'Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas' on the anniversary of the proclamation of Emergency in 1975.

Delhi High Court Rules In Favour Of RPF Candidate Denied Job Due To Pregnancy, Orders ₹1 Lakh Costs To Recently Injured Woman Staff

Title: ISHA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 846

Ruling in favour of a woman who was denied appointment as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force in 2019 due to her pregnancy, the Delhi High Court imposed Rs. 1 lakh costs on the Central Government to be paid to a lady employee who recently got injured when a portion of the roof in the court building fell on her.

Non-Bailable Warrant U/S 73 CrPC Cannot Be Issued To Produce Accused Before Police For Investigation: Delhi High Court

Case title: LAKSHAY JAISWAL vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 847

The Delhi High Court has ruled that issuance of a non-bailable warrant under Section 73 CrPC by a Magistrate, for the production of the accused before the police for investigation is illegal, as such a warrant could only be issued for the production of the accused before a court.

Failure To Carry Out Physical Verification Of Veracity Of Exporter Alone Is No Basis To Suspend License Of Custom Broker: Delhi HC

Case Title: Aradhya Export Import Consultants Pvt Ltd Verses Commissioner Of Customs

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 848

The Delhi High Court held that a custom broker cannot be held guilty of having failed to discharge the obligation placed in terms of Regulation 10(n) of CBLR 2018, simply because he has not carried out physical verification of the veracity of the exporter.

Delhi High Court Orders CBI Probe Against Litigant Who Filed Repeated Pleas Alleging Unauthorised Constructions

Title: RAHUL KUMAR v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 849

The Delhi High Court has recently ordered inquiry to be conducted by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against a litigant who repeatedly filed petitions, including PILs, alleging unauthorised constructions, some of which were never listed in court.

Educational Activities Neither Business Nor Profession, Covered Under Section 2 (15) Of Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: CIT(E) Versus NIIT Foundation

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 850

The Delhi High Court has held that the assessee is carrying on educational activities that are covered by the provisions of Section 2 (15) of the Income Tax Act, and it is neither business nor profession of the assessee.

It Is Not Permissible To Compare Competing Trademarks By Dissecting Its Parts: Delhi High Court Rules Against Loreal

Case Title: Loreal India vs. Rajesh Kumar Taneja Trading

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 852

While emphasizing that the object of examination is to ensure the compliance of the provisions of the Trademarks Act, the Delhi High Court held that no interference with the registration of the trademark would be warranted, unless it is prima facie established that the registration of the trademark falls foul of the provisions of the Act.

Delhi High Court Directs Baba Ramdev To Take Down Claims Blaming Allopathy For Covid-19 Deaths And Promoting Coronil

Case Title: Resident Doctors Association, AIIMS (Rishikesh) & Ors. v. Ram Kishan Yadav alias Swami Ramdev & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 853

The Delhi High Court has directed Yoga guru Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balakrishna to remove their statements claiming that allopathy was responsible for deaths of lakhs of people in COVID-19 and that Patanjali's Coronil is a “cure” for virus.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani passed order in the interim injunction application moved in a suit filed by various doctors' associations in 2021.

Section 34 Of Arbitration Act Can't Be Used To Seek Re-Litigation: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Krishan Kumar & Anr Vs Shakuntla Agency Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 854

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that that Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot be used as a tool for a litigant to desist from participating in the arbitral proceedings, despite being fully aware thereof, and, thereafter, seek a “second bite at the arbitral cherry”.

Article 23A Of Schedule I-A Of Stamp Act Applies To Agreements To Sell Under Section 53A Of Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Sharad Bhansali & Anr. Vs Mukesh Aggarwal & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 855

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C.Hari Shankar has held that Article 23A of Schedule I-A of the Stamp Act applicable in Delhi covers Agreement to Sell to which Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act (TPA) applies.

PM Modi Interview: Delhi High Court Orders 4PM's Editor-In-Chief To Remove 'Defamatory Tweets' Against The New Indian's Rohan Dua

Title: RAJATARANGINI INDIA MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. v. SANJAY SHARMA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 856

The Delhi High Court has recently passed an ad-interim injunction order for removal of “defamatory tweets” posted by Sanjay Sharma, Editor-In-Chief of Lucknow's evening daily, 4 PM Evening Newspaper, and two other individuals against The New Indian's Editor-In-Chief Rohan Dua in relation to his interview with Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the 2024 general elections.

Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order Directing Removal Of Articles, Posts About Criminal Case Against Acquitted Businessman

Title: X v. THE INDIA TODAY GROUP & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 857

Passing a john doe order, the Delhi High Court has recently ordered removal of news articles and social media posts against a businessman on X, formerly Twitter, regarding a criminal case registered against him in 2018 after his honourable acquittal the next year.

Arbitrators Must Separately Calculate Fees For Claims And Counterclaims In Ad Hoc Arbitration: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Ahluwalia Contracts India Limited Vs Union Of India Through Executive Engineer Cpwd & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 858

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has set aside computration of fee by an arbitration on the basis decision in Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. vs. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd which was later set aside in ONGC Ltd. v. Afcons Gunanusa JV, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 723.

ITC Claimed On Alleged Fake Supplies; Delhi High Court Upholds Dept's Action In Provisionally Attaching Bank Account

Case Title: JV Creatives Pvt. Ltd. Versus Principal Additional Director General, DGGI, Gurugram Zonal Unit, Gurugram And Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 859

The Delhi High Court has upheld the Commissioner's action of provisionally attaching the petitioner's bank account, to the extent of Rs. 26.91 lakhs being the amount of input tax (ITC) claimed in respect of allegedly fake supplies.

'Adulterer' Not Necessary Party To Divorce Petition, Decree Can Be Passed In His Or Her Absence: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 860

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that an alleged adulterer, being a third party and suspected of having an affair with a spouse, is not a necessary party to a divorce petition.

A division bench comprising Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Amit Bansal said that a decree can be passed in the absence of such an individual.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL For Dual Citizenship For Indian Diaspora

Title: Pravasi Legal Cell v. Union of India & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 861

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a PIL seeking grant of dual citizenship for Indian diaspora, holding their citizenship presently at some other foreign country.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that the issue falls within the domain of the Parliament and it is not for the court to decide or pass directions on it.

Stakeholders Can't Impose Penalties, Claim Dues From Corporate Debtor After Approval Of Resolution Plan: Delhi High Court

Case Title: OCL Iron and Steel Limited vs Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 862

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula held once a resolution plan is accepted, the stakeholders cannot impose penalties or claim dues from the Corporate Debtor based on past liabilities.