Delhi High Court Monthly Digest: May 2024 [Citations 523 - 665]

AMARJEET GUPTA v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 524

ANIL KUMAR HAJELAY & ORS. v. HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 525

M/S Krish Overseas Versus Commissioner Central Tax-Delhi West & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 526

DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD v. DULARI DEVI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 528

PFIZER PRODUCTS INC. v. RENOVISION EXPORTS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 529

SHOAIB ALAM @ BOBBY v. STATE and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 530

ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 531

CIT verses Dabur India Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 532

Shri Sita Ram & Others vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 533

LAWYER'S VOICE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 534

Remy Israni vs R. B. Seth Jessa Ram Hospital And Bros 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 535

M/S Madras Trading Co Vs Ramjeet @ Ramajeet & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 536

SUNNY ALIAS RAVI KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHII 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 537

SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 538

VIJAY DARDA v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 539

National Highways Authority Of India Vs M/S Kcc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 540

Feroz Ahmed Bhatt Vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 541

Dr. Shashi Bhushan Vs. University of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 542

Kanchanjunga Building Employees Union Vs Kanchanjunga Flat Owner's Society & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 543

Pawan Kumar Mathuri. vs UOI & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 544

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT v. AKHILESH SINGH & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 545

ANJALI COLLEGE OF PHARMACY AND SCIENCE THROUGH ITS FOUNDER -CUM-CHAIRMAN DEVENDRA GUPTA v. DR. MONTU M. PATEL PRESIDENT PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 580

Shaheen Abdulla & Ors. v. Election Commission of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 581

Jasmine Kaur Chhabra v. UOI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 582

M/S Durga Trading Company And Ors Versus The Additional Director General (Adjudication) And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 583

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA, & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 585

SARVESH v. ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 586

SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 587

BEIERSDORF AG v. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 588

State v. PDD and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 590

Mercator Ltd. Vs Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd And Connected Matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 591

Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 592

Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited Vs Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 594

Deepak Maurya Vs Saraswathi Supari Processing Unit & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 595

KARIM HOTELS PVT LTD & ANR v. NIZAMUDDIN & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 596

Delhi Tourism And Transportation Development Corporation Vs M/S Satinder Mahajan 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 597

Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 599

SANJEEV KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 600

Rachita Francis Xavier v Union of India & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 601

JAIKISHAN KAKUBHAI SARAF ALIAS JACKIE SHROFF v. THE PEPPY STORE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 602

Relaxo Footwears Limited v XS Brands Consultancy Private Limited & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 603

REKHA AND ORS v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 604

MUNNA SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 638

SHREE HANUMANT DHARMIK RAMLEELA COMMITTEE REGD & ANR. v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 639

SHRIKANT PRASAD v. GOVT OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 640

SpiceJet v. TWC Aviation 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 641

YAMIN ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 643

REKHA OBEROI v. AMIT OBEROI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 644

ABOOBACKER E. v. National Investigation Agency 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 645

ED v. Ajay S Mittal 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 646

MANJU TOKAS & ANR v. GNCT OF DELHI THROUGH DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 647

PRACHEEN SHIV MANDIR AVAM AKHADA SAMITI v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 649

CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 650

Dr. Satendra Singh Vas Union Of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 651

Purvanchal Hathkargha Sahakari Sangh Ltd Vs All India Handloom Fabrics Society And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 652

M/S Power Mech Projects Ltd Vs M/S Doosan Power Systems India Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 654

CA RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 655

Abhimanyu Through Special Power Of Attorney Holder Vs Parmesh Construction Co. Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 656

RAJESH KUMAR MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 657

DELHI TAMIL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 659

Communication Component Antenna Inc v. Mobi Antenna Technologies 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 660

SANSER PAL SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 661

KAMLESH JAIN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 662

Colgate Palmolive Company & Ors v State of NCT & Anr & Connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 663

Jaipuria Edutech Foundation vs. Shyamlalbabu Educational Trust 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 664

Sanjay Khatri vs. State of NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 665

"Highly Adventurous Plea": Delhi High Court Refuses To Permit Arrested Politicians To Campaign Through VC For Lok Sabha Polls 2024

Title: AMARJEET GUPTA v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 524

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking a direction upon the Election Commission of India (ECI) to develop a mechanism to ensure that arrested political leaders are allowed to campaign through VC for the ongoing Lok Sabha polls 2024.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora said that it is a highly adventurous plea, contrary to fundamental principles of law.

High Court Issues Directions To Implement Hybrid Courts Project, Directs Delhi Govt To Expedite Financial Sanction

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 525

The Delhi High Court has recently issued various directions for implementing the project for having hybrid hearing in the courts in the national capital.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora directed the Delhi Government to forthwith expedite the financial sanction in respect of all 691 courts as stated in preliminary estimate of approximately Rs. 387 crore.

Life Of Provisional Attachment Order Is Only One Year: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Krish Overseas Versus Commissioner Central Tax-Delhi West & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 526

The Delhi High Court has held that the life of an order of provisional attachment is only one year.

The bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that the communication of attachment is dated August 14, 2019, and a period of one year has elapsed since the issuance of the communication.

High Court Stays Delhi Govt's Circular Mandating Private Unaided Schools To Get Prior Approval Before Fee Hike

Title: ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS v. DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 527

The Delhi High Court has stayed a circular issued by the Delhi Government stating that no recognized private unaided school in the national capital, which has been allotted land by government agencies, shall enhance fee for the upcoming 2024-25 academic session without the prior sanction of Director of Education (DoE).

Justice C Hari Shankar stayed the circular issued on March 27 which barred all Private Recognized Unaided Schools from raising the fee without prior sanction of the DoE.

Monthly Pension Of ₹3K To Building And Construction Workers Is Minuscule In City Like Delhi: High Court

Title: DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD v. DULARI DEVI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 528

The Delhi High Court has observed that monthly pension of Rs. 3000 to building and construction workers is minuscule, given the cost of living in a city like the national capital.

The building and construction workers are, who are registered with the Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board, are entitled for a monthly pension of Rs. 3000 after completion of 60 years.

Delhi High Court Rules In Favour Of Pfizer In 'Viagra' Drug Suit, Permanently Restrains Oil Manufacturer From Using 'Vigoura' Mark

Title: PFIZER PRODUCTS INC. v. RENOVISION EXPORTS PVT. LTD. AND ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 529

The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained a homeopathic oil manufacturer from selling its products under the mark “Vigoura” after pharmaceutical company Pfizer accused it of infringing its registered trademark “Viagra” used for an erectile dysfunction allopathic drug.

Justice Sanjeev Narula observed that the trademark “Viagra” is highly recognized by its name in the sphere of erectile dysfunction drugs and has also acquired national and global repute.

Delhi Riots: High Court Grants Bail To Three Men In IB Officer Ankit Sharma Murder Case, Bail Denied To One

Title: SHOAIB ALAM @ BOBBY v. STATE and other connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 530

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to three men, Shoaib Alam, Gulfam and Javed, accused in the murder case of Intelligence Bureau (IB) staffer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Justice Navin Chawla however dismissed the bail plea moved by other accused, Nazim, in the case.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL For Having 4-Yr LLB Course

Case Title: ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 531

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a PIL seeking a direction on Centre to constitute a “Legal Education Commission” comprising of retired judges, law professors and lawyers to ascertain the feasibility of four years LLB course.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora remarked that it is not the court's domain to design courses and that the authorities will decide the issue.

Eligible Industrial Undertakings Carrying Out Manufacturing Activity Is Only Essential Requisite For Claiming Benefit Of Sec 80IC: Delhi High Court

Case Title: CIT verses Dabur India Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 532

The Delhi High Court dismisses Revenue's appeal against ITAT's order in case of Dabur India Ltd., while reiterating that for purpose of deduction u/s 80IB & 80IC of the Income tax Act, the only essential requisite is that the eligible industrial undertakings should be carrying out manufacture or production of articles or things.

Implementation Of Pay Scales Involves Executive Discretion, Courts Can't Intervene Unless There Is Illegality Or Glaring Irregularity: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Shri Sita Ram & Others vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 533

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that implementation of revised pay scales involves executive discretion and courts do not have the authority to intervene unless there is evidence of illegality or a glaring irregularity.

The case involved allegations against the Municipal Corporation of Delhi for failure to implement an enhanced pay scale for its technicians, as recommended by the 5th Pay Commission. It was held that the petitioners (technicians) were not entitled to the enhanced pay scale since it couldn't be construed as a legally vested right.

'Can't Pass A Direction In Middle Of Elections, ECI Will Take Action': Delhi High Court Closes PIL To Curb Circulation Of Deepfake Videos

Title: LAWYER'S VOICE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 534

The Delhi High Court on Thursday disposed of a public interest litigation (PIL) to curb circulation of deepfake videos during the ongoing Lok Sabha polls, observing that it cannot pass a direction in the middle of the elections and that the Election Commission of India (ECI) is not remediless and will act on the issue.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora disposed of the PIL filed by lawyers voice and asked the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation to the ECI during the course of the day.

Industrial Disputes Act Is Beneficial Legislation; Strict Timelines Under Commercial Courts Act Or CPC Ought Not To Apply: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Remy Israni vs R. B. Seth Jessa Ram Hospital And Bros

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 535

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee partially upheld the order of an Industrial Tribunal to allow a Worklady to submit additional documents along with her affidavit of evidence. The bench held that the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is a beneficial legislation where the strict timelines under the Commercial Courts Act or the CPC ought not to be applied.

Appeal Under Section 30 Of Employees Compensation Act Must Involve Substantial Question Of Law: Delhi High Court

Case Title:M/S Madras Trading Co Vs Ramjeet @ Ramajeet & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 536

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma held that Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, which provides for appeals against orders of compensation and other related matters, can only be exercised when the appeal involves a substantial question of law.

No Wrongdoing Can Be Attributed To Consensual Sexual Acts Between Adults Regardless Of Their Marital Status: Delhi High Court

Title: SUNNY ALIAS RAVI KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHII

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 537

The Delhi High Court has observed that no wrongdoing can be attributed if two consenting adults indulge in consensual sexual activity, regardless of their marital status.

“While societal norms dictate that sexual relations should ideally occur within the confines of marriage, no wrongdoing can be attributed if consensual sexual activity occurs between two consenting adults, regardless of their marital status,” Justice Amit Mahajan said.

Delhi High Court Orders Action Against Use Of Oxytocin In Dairy Colonies, Directs Police Investigation

Title: SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 538

The Delhi High Court has ordered action against the use of spurious Oxytocin hormone in dairy colonies in the national capital and directed that the cases registered be investigated by jurisdictional police stations.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora said that administering Oxytocin amounts to animal cruelty and is a cognizable offence under Section 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

Coal Scam: Delhi High Court Orders Renewal Of Ex-MP Vijay Darda's Passport For Three Years

Title: VIJAY DARDA v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 539

The Delhi High Court has ordered renewal of passport of former Rajya Sabha MP Vijay Darda, convicted in a coal scam case, for a period of three years.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that Darda was granted permission on past many occasions to travel abroad and he did not misused the liberty granted to him.

Allegations Against Arbitral Tribunal Without Any Basis Is Contrary To Letter And Spirit Of Arbitral Process: Delhi High Court

Case Title: National Highways Authority Of India Vs M/S Kcc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 540

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that making allegations against the Arbitral Tribunal without any basis is contrary to the letter and spirit of the arbitral process.

Delhi High Court Denies Parole To Convicted Terrorist Feroz Ahmed Bhatt Citing Security Concerns, Permits One-Time VC With Parents

Case Title: Feroz Ahmed Bhatt Vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 541

The Delhi High Court has declined parole to Feroz Ahmed Bhatt, a convicted terrorist who has served over two decades in prison and had applied for temporary release to travel to Jammu and Kashmir.

The court cited concerns that his presence in the region could pose a threat to broader security interests. Despite the convict's request for parole to visit his parents and marry, the court ruled against it. Instead, the court directed the jail superintendent to facilitate a one-time video call between Bhatt and his parents.

Candidate In Final Selection List Does Not Have An Indefeasible Right To Appointment : Delhi High Court Reiterates

Case Name- Dr. Shashi Bhushan Vs. University of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 542

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Dr. Shashi Bhushan Vs. University of Delhi has held that a candidate even in the final selection list does not have an indefeasible right to appointment.

Burden Of Proof In Establishing Employer-Employee Relationship Rests With Party Claiming It, Delhi High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Filed By Workmen

Case Title: Kanchanjunga Building Employees Union Vs Kanchanjunga Flat Owner's Society & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 543

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that the onus of proof in establishing an employer-employee relationship rests with the party making such a claim. The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by certain Workmen hired on a contractual basis, who failed to establish a direct relationship with the Association they were working for.

Transfer, Being An Exigency Of Service, Is Neither A Matter Of Right Nor Choice: Delhi High Court

Case Name- Pawan Kumar Mathuri. vs UOI & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 544

A Division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Saurabh Banerjee while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Pawan Kumar Mathuri. vs UOI & Ors. has held that transfer, being an exigency of service, is neither a matter of right nor a matter of choice.

Properties Attached Under PMLA To Be Released After Acquittal Or Discharge In Scheduled Offence: Delhi High Court

Title: DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT v. AKHILESH SINGH & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 545

The Delhi High Court has ruled that once a person is discharged or acquitted from the scheduled offence, the properties attached under the PMLA cannot legally be treated as proceeds of crime or be viewed as property derived or obtained from criminal activity.

Delhi High Court Stays Felling Of Trees In Central Ridge, Orders Removal Of Garbage

Title: ANJALI COLLEGE OF PHARMACY AND SCIENCE THROUGH ITS FOUNDER -CUM-CHAIRMAN DEVENDRA GUPTA v. DR. MONTU M. PATEL PRESIDENT PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 580

The Delhi High Court has directed that no further felling of trees or removal of shrubs and other bushes shall take place in the Central Ridge in the national capital, without the permission of the Court.

The court has also directed the Forest Department and other local authorities to ensure that no dumping of garbage or any other waste material is carried out in the Central Ridge.

"Misconceived": Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Seeking FIR Against Prime Minister Narendra Modi Over Alleged 'Hate Speeches'

Title: Shaheen Abdulla & Ors. v. Election Commission of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 581

The Delhi High Court rejected a plea seeking immediate action against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other candidates for delivering allegedly “communally divisive speeches” in violation of the Model Code of Conduct amid the Lok Sabha polls.

Justice Sachin Datta rejected the plea observing that the same is wholly misconceived.

143 Separate Public Toilets Built For Transgender Persons, Construction Of 253 More Underway: Delhi Govt To High Court

Case Title: Jasmine Kaur Chhabra v. UOI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 582

The Delhi Government has informed the Delhi High Court that 143 separate public toilets have been constructed in the national capital for transgender persons.

The court is also informed that the construction of 223 public toilets for transgender persons is in process and the same is yet to start for 30 more toilets.

Show Cause Notice Not Adjudicated For Nearly 14 Years; Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Dept.

Case Title: M/S Durga Trading Company And Ors Versus The Additional Director General (Adjudication) And Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 583

A division bench of the Delhi High Court, comprising Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja, has issued the notice to the department in a petition assailing the jurisdiction to adjudicate the Show Cause Notice, which has not been adjudicated for nearly 14 years.

The petitioner/assessee is a manufacturer of Pan Masala containing tobacco commonly known as Gutkha, commercially engaging under the brand name "Pukar.”

AO Can't Proceed With Assessment In Absence Of Section 127 Transfer Order: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Rajsheela Growth Fund (P) Ltd. Versus ITO

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 584

The Delhi High Court has held that the Assessing Officer cannot proceed with assessment in the absence of a transfer order under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act.

The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed that once the case of the assessee is centralized, then the transfer of the case of the assessee to another AO would not be permissible without a decentralization order or transfer order under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, as contrary to such a position outside the underlying objective that the Act seeks to achieve by virtue of powers enshrined under Section 127.

Delhi High Court Allows Police's Plea To Verify 'Forged Aadhar Card' Details Of Accused With Aadhar Data Bank

Title: STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA, & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 585

The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to provide to the Delhi Police all information pertaining to a “forged Aadhar card”, recovered from a man accused of supplying fake currency notes, for verifying it with the Aadhar data bank.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri allowed Delhi Police's plea seeking verification of the forged Aadhar card with the database, after the details did not match with the accused when checked on the UIDAI website.

Implement Recommendations Of Court Constituted Committee To Improve Medical Services: Delhi High Court To Chief Secretary

Title: SARVESH v. ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 586

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government's Chief Secretary to ensure implementation of the recommendations given by a seven member Committee constituted by the court to streamline the process of availing free medical treatment under various government schemes in the hospitals in the national capital.

Delhi High Court Issues Directions To Maintain Hygiene In Dairies, Medical Care Of Cattle

Title: SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 587

The Delhi High Court has recently issued a slew of directions for maintaining hygiene in dairies in the national capital, to ensure medical care of cattle kept therein and for use of spurious oxytocin.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Ps Arora was prima facie not persuaded by the submission of the Delhi Government's Chief Secretary that the cattle in the dairies adjoining sanitary landfill sites in Delhi can be prevented from eating hazardous waste until 2025-26.

Delhi High Court Restrains HUL From Comparing Its 'Ponds' Products With 'Nivea', Says In-Mall Marketing Campaigns Also Advertisements

Title: BEIERSDORF AG v. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 588

The Delhi High Court has restrained Hindustan Unilever Limited from engaging in marketing or advertising activity of comparing its 'Ponds' products with 'Nivea' products, either expressly or by implication or association, through sale representatives in various malls in the national capital and Gurugram.

Delhi High Court Directs Assessing Officer To Decide Centre For Policy Research's Application To Stay Income Tax Demand Afresh

Title: CENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 14, DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 589

The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to decide afresh the application moved by the Indian public policy think tank Centre for Policy Research (CPR) seeking a stay of the income tax demand for the year 2022-23.

A division bench comprising of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav set aside the Assessing Officer's order passed on May 03 disposing of CPR's application for stay of the demand, while requiring the think tank to deposit 20% of the outstanding demand as a pre-condition for granting protection.

Delhi High Court Reverses Acquittal, Holds Father Guilty Of Repeatedly Raping Minor Daughter

Title: State v. PDD and other connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 590

The Delhi High Court has reversed the acquittal of a man and held him guilty for repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting his minor daughter for around two years in 2011-13.

The man was acquitted by the trial court in June 2019. The FIR was registered on January 2013 on the basis of the victim's statement alleging that she was being assaulted by him for the last two years- 2011. The last incident of sexual assault was reported to be on January 04, 2013.

[Arbitration Act] Public Policy While Considering Enforcement Of Foreign Awards Has To Be Construed Narrowly, In Consonance With International Notions: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Mercator Ltd. Vs Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd And Connected Matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 591

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that the public policy argument while considering enforcement of foreign awards has to be construed narrowly and in consonance with international notions of public policy. The bench held that all violations of statute or supporting legislation do not satisfy this ground, and violations must be of fundamental policies considered shocking to the conscience of the Court.

Case Title: Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 592

The Delhi High Court has deleted the addition for unexplained expenditure, which was based on the instruction issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).

“Merely proceeding on the basis that CBIC is an apex body and therefore, information provided by it cannot be doubted, without even identifying or meaningfully analyzing such information, is wholly insufficient to proceed to make an addition,” the bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju observed.

Monetary Limit Of Rs. 1 Crore For Appeals To High Court; Delhi High Court Dismisses Dept's Appeal

Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Customs, ACC Imports New Delhi Versus M/S. Salasar Synthetics

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 593

The Delhi High Court has dismissed the challenging redemption fine of Rs. 40 lakhs, citing instructions issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), which set the monetary limit of Rs. 1 crore for appeals to the high court.

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Injunction under S.9 of A&C act Restricting Savera Eats' Usage of 'Burger Singh'

Case Title: Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited Vs Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 594

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula granted an ex-parte interim injunction in favor of Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited to prevent Savera Eats from using the “Burger Singh” registered trademark. The bench held that despite the termination of the franchise agreement, Savera Eats continued to operate the franchise outlet under the Petitioner's registered trademark “Burger Singh”.

Court not Mechanically Send Dispute To Arbitral Tribunal, Must Consider Fundamental Issues u/s 11(6A): Delhi High Court

Case Title: Deepak Maurya Vs Saraswathi Supari Processing Unit & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 595

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that the Court is not required to behave in a mechanical manner to send a party's dispute to the arbitral tribunal and must consider the fundamental issues, within the parameters outlined in Section 11(6-A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Delhi High Court Rules In Favour Of Karim's In Trademark Lawsuit Against Karin's

Title: KARIM HOTELS PVT LTD & ANR v. NIZAMUDDIN & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 596

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled in favour of Karim Hotels in its trademark infringement suit against a restaurant operated under the name Karin's.

Justice Sanjeev Narula decreed the suit in favour of Karim Hotels Private Limited and Karim's Mughlai Foods, which was accorded a license by the former authorising it to use “KARIM'S” trademark for commercial exploitation in relation to restaurant services.

Seat Of Arbitration To Be Determined On Basis Of Connection With Arbitration Proceedings, Not With Cause Of Action: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Delhi Tourism And Transportation Development Corporation Vs M/S Satinder Mahajan

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 597

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that the seat of the arbitration proceedings is to be determined on the basis of connection with the arbitral proceedings, and not with the cause of action for the underlying disputes.

[Arbitration Act] Enforcement Of Foreign Awards Should Not Be Declined On Composition Of Tribunal If Not Raised Before Tribunal Or Seat Court: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Mercator Ltd. Vs Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd And Connected Matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 598

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that enforcement of foreign awards should not be declined on grounds relating to the composition of the tribunal, which could have been raised before the Tribunal and before the seat Court, but were not so raised. It held that the judgment debtor did not object, even at the stage of appointment, on this ground.

Unexplained Expenditure Addition Merely Based On CBIC Instruction Not Sustainable: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 599

The Delhi High Court has deleted the addition for unexplained expenditure, which was based on the instruction issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).

Delhi High Court Initiates Suo Moto Criminal Contempt Case Against Lawyer Who Made Personal Remarks On Judges

Title: SANJEEV KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 600

The Delhi High Court has initiated suo moto criminal contempt case against a lawyer who made personal remarks on judges and posted contemptuous comments in the chat box while appearing through virtual mode during proceedings.

“Petitioner appears to have taken a wrong end of law, aggrieved against adverse orders passed by the Judicial Officers of the District Courts as well as this Court and cannot be permitted to cross the red line, thereby making personal attack on the Judges which undermines the integrity of the Institution,” Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta said.

'Special Circumstances': Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Grant Citizenship U/S 5(4) To 17-Yr-Old Born In India To OCI Card Holders

Case Title: Rachita Francis Xavier v Union of India & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 601

The Delhi High Court recently ordered the Central government to confer citizenship upon a 17-year-old girl who was born and raised in India to parents holding Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) status but were citizens of the United States at the time of her birth.

Delhi High Court Restrains Entities From Infringing Personality Rights Of Bollywood Actor Jackie Shroff

Title: JAIKISHAN KAKUBHAI SARAF ALIAS JACKIE SHROFF v. THE PEPPY STORE & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 602

The Delhi High Court has recently restrained various entities from infringing the personality and publicity rights of Bollywood actor Jackie Shroff.

Justice Sanjeev Narula passed an interim injunction order in favour of the actor in his suit seeking protection of his personality rights.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Relaxo's Plea Against HRX's Use Of 'X' Mark In Trademark For Footwear

Case Title: Relaxo Footwears Limited v XS Brands Consultancy Private Limited & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 603

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea by leading footwear manufacturer Relaxo, which sought to prevent HRX from using the 'X' mark in its trademark for selling footwear.

Justice Anish Dayal, presiding over the case, denied the interim injunction application filed by Relaxo. He rejected Relaxo's claim that the 'X' used by HRX appeared deceptively similar to the 'X' used by Relaxo's Sparx brand of footwear.

Delhi High Court Orders ₹30 Lakh Compensation To Kin Of Three Deceased Manual Scavengers

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 604

The Delhi High Court has ordered compensation of Rs. 30 lakh each to the kin of three manual scavengers who died while cleaning a drain in 2017.

Justice Sachin Datta directed the city authorities to pay the amount to the families within eight weeks.

Delhi High Court Calls For Sensitization Of Trial Court Judges On Immediate Supply Of Conviction Orders To Accused

Title: MUNNA SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 638

The Delhi High Court has called for the sensitization of all the judges of trial courts in the national capital to pronounce their judgments on conviction only when the order is ready and immediately provide a copy to the accused who has to be taken into custody.

Justice Navin Chawla directed that the order be circulated to the Principal District and Sessions judges of all the District Courts in Delhi.

Delhi High Court Restricts Ramleela Function Bookings In DDA Grounds Till Fresh SOP Is Published

Title: SHREE HANUMANT DHARMIK RAMLEELA COMMITTEE REGD & ANR. v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 639

The Delhi High Court has barred any further offline or online bookings of Ramleela functions in the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) grounds till a new SOP aur guidelines for booking is published by the authority.

Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju directed the DDA to formulate comprehensive SOPs or guidelines for booking of Ramleela sites within five weeks' and no later than June 25.

Delhi High Court Waives ₹1 Lakh Costs Imposed On Lawyer For Filing PIL Concerning CM Arvind Kejriwal, Asks Him To Do Community Service

Title: SHRIKANT PRASAD v. GOVT OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 640

The Delhi High Court has waived Rs. 1 lakh costs imposed on a lawyer who filed public interest litigation to restrain the media houses from creating “pressure and airing sensational headlines” regarding Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's resignation and imposition of President Rule in the national capital.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora directed the petitioner, Shrikant Prasad, to do community service in accordance with the directions of the DSLSA.

Delhi High Court Declines To Interfere With Single Judge Order Asking SpiceJet To Handover Leased Aircrafts With Engines To TWC Aviation

Title: SpiceJet v. TWC Aviation

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 641

The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with a single judge's order directing airline SpiceJet to handover two Boeing Aircrafts with engines to TWC Aviation over unpaid dues.

A division bench comprising of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Amit Bansal however directed SpiceJet to return the aircrafts and engines to the lessor by June 17.

High Court Appoints Delhi Chief Secretary As Nodal Authority To Draft Procedure For Preventing Tree Felling In DU North Campus

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 642

The Delhi High Court has appointed Delhi Government's Chief Secretary as the nodal authority to draft the procedure for preventing felling or transplantation of trees in the North Campus, Delhi University for its expansion or development of infrastructure.

Justice Jasmeet Singh asked the Chief Secretary to would call all the stakeholders, including the Delhi Urban Art Commission (DUAC), Amici Curiae (Advocates Aditya N. Prasad, Gautam Narayan and Prabhsahay Kaur), the municipal authorities and any other agency necessary in his opinion.

High Court Rejects Plea Challenging Appointment Of Delhi Waqf Board's Administrator, Imposes ₹10K Costs

Title: YAMIN ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 643

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the appointment of Administrator of Delhi Waqf Board with costs of Rs. 10,000.

Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the plea was an absolute abuse of the process of law without giving any valid reasons as to why the appointment should be quashed.

Section 15(1) Of Hindu Succession Act Works Against Widow Of Pre-Deceased Son, Needs Rectification: Delhi High Court

Title: REKHA OBEROI v. AMIT OBEROI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 644

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that Section 15(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, unfortunately, works against the widow of a pre-deceased son, while it is intended to benefit another woman being a deceased woman.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said that the provision, which provides general rules of succession of property of a female Hindu dying intestate, is an anomaly in the legislation which needs rectification.

Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Former PFI Chairman E Abubacker, Says Prima Facie Commission Of UAPA Offences

Title: ABOOBACKER E. v. National Investigation Agency

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 645

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the plea moved by E Abubacker, former chairman of Popular Front of India (PFI), seeking bail in the UAPA case being probed by the National Investigation Agency.

A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain dismissed the appeal moved by Abubacker who sought bail on the merits as well as medical grounds.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Transferring PMLA Case After Judge Said 'ED Matters Me Kaunsi Bail Hoti Hain'

Title: ED v. Ajay S Mittal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 646

The Delhi High Court has set aside a trial court order transferring Bhushan Steel money laundering case from one judge to another, after one of the accused alleged that the judge passed a comment expressing "ED matters me kaun si bail hoti hai?”

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the alleged comment did not reflect any apprehension of bias against the accused or something in favour of the prosecuting agency.

Forums Under Senior Citizens Act Can't Decide Question Of Property Title: Delhi High Court

Title: MANJU TOKAS & ANR v. GNCT OF DELHI THROUGH DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 647

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the forums under the Senior Citizens Act cannot decide question of title of properties.

“A reading of the Act makes it clear that the forum under the Act do not have the jurisdiction to decide the title of the property and the purpose of the Act is maintenance of the Senior Citizen and to ensure their welfare. The question of title, therefore, cannot be decided by forums under the Senior Citizens Act,” Justice Subramonium Prasad said.

Delhi High Court Grants Statutory Bail To Sharjeel Imam In Sedition Case

Title: Sharjeel Imam v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 648

The Delhi High Court has granted statutory bail to Sharjeel Imam in a UAPA and sedition case relating to the alleged inflammatory speeches made by him in Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia area in the national capital against the Citizenship Amendment Act.

A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain allowed Imam's bail plea. He had challenged the trial court order denying him statutory bail in the case.

'Lord Shiva Doesn't Need Our Protection': Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Against Demolition Of Temple "Encroaching" Yamuna Flood Plains Area

Title: PRACHEEN SHIV MANDIR AVAM AKHADA SAMITI v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 649

The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea against the action of Delhi Development Authority (DDA) demolishing the Pracheen Shiv Mandir situated near city's Geeta Colony and located near Yamuna Flood Plains.

Justice Dharmesh Sharma observed that Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti, which filed the plea, miserably failed to demonstrate any legal rights existing with it so as to continue to use and occupy the civic property for running the temple services.

'Unsubstantiated Allegations': Delhi High Court Rejects Another Plea To Disqualify PM Narendra Modi From Contesting 2024 General Polls

Title: CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 650

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Narendra Modi from contesting the 2024 general elections.

Justice Sachin Datta rejected the plea filed by Captain Deepak Kumar alleging that Modi and his accomplices attempted to destabilize the national security by planning a fatal crash of an Air India flight in 2018 where he was pilot. Kumar also said Modi "made a false Oath or affirmation which otherwise must be made after the nomination paper has been submitted to RO."

Delhi High Court Orders Indian Nursing Council To Consider Representation On Inclusive Disability Reservation In B.Sc. Nursing Program

Case Title: Dr. Satendra Singh Vas Union Of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 651

The Delhi High Court has directed the Indian Nursing Council (INC) to address a representation challenging Clause 8 of the 'Admission Terms and Conditions' under the Revised Regulations and Curriculum for B.Sc. (Nursing Program) Regulations, 2020.

The court has ordered that the current writ petition be treated as a formal representation to INC, which must decide on the matter in accordance with the law, preferably within four weeks.

Notice Under Section 21 Of Arbitration Act Is Pre-Requisite For Initiation Of Proceedings Under Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Purvanchal Hathkargha Sahakari Sangh Ltd Vs All India Handloom Fabrics Society And Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 652

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that except power conferred to the Central Registrar under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 for appointment of an Arbitrator, the other provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall remain in operation. It held that the notice as required under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would be a pre-requisite even for initiation of proceedings under Section 84 of the Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002.

Termination Of Arbitrator's Mandate Doesn't Equate To Termination Of Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Extramarks Education India Pvt. Ltd Vs Saraswati Shishu Mandir

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 653

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that that the termination of an arbitrator's mandate does not equate to the termination of the arbitral proceedings. Instead, it allows for the appointment of a substitute arbitrator to ensure the continuation of the proceedings.

Court Fully Empowered To Extend Mandate Even After Expiry Of Arbitral Tribunal's Mandate Under Section 29A(4): Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Power Mech Projects Ltd Vs M/S Doosan Power Systems India Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 654

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held the court is fully empowered to extend the mandate, even after the expiry of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

'No Locus': Delhi High Court Dismisses With Cost Plea Seeking Reasons Behind SC Collegium Recommendations For High Court Judges Appointment

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 655

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea seeking details about the reason for recommendation for High Court judges appointment remitted by Collegium of the Supreme Court of India to the High Court Collegium.

Justice Subramonium Prasad rejected the plea moved by CA Rakesh Kumar Gupta and imposed Rs. 25,000 costs on him to be deposited with the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund.

Where Arbitration Seat Is Fixed, Only Such Court Shall Have Exclusive Jurisdiction To Entertain Application Under Section 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Abhimanyu Through Special Power Of Attorney Holder Vs Parmesh Construction Co. Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 656

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that where the arbitration seat is fixed, only such court shall have exclusive jurisdiction. It held that the cause of action arose at Noida, the agreement was executed at Noida, and the suit property is also situated at Noida. Therefore, the courts in Noida have jurisdiction over the appointment of an arbitrator.

Bank Can't Open LOC As An Arm Twisting Tactic To Recover Debt: Delhi High Court

Title: RAJESH KUMAR MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 657

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that a Bank cannot open a Lookout Circular (LOC) as an arm-twisting tactic to recover debt from an individual.

“This Court is of the opinion that after resorting to all the remedies available in law, the Bank cannot open a Lookout Circular as an arm-twisting tactic to recover debt from a person who is otherwise unable to pay more so when there are no allegations that he was engaged in any fraud or in any siphoning off or defalcation of the amounts given as loan,” Justice Subramonium Prasad said.

Period Of Bonafide Negotiations May Be Excluded For Computing Period Of Limitation For Reference: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Blooming Orchid Vs Fp Life Education Foundation

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 658

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held the period during which the parties were bona fide negotiating towards an amicable settlement may be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation for reference to Arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Aided Minority Institutions Have Absolute Right To Appoint Principals, Teachers; DoE Can Only Prescribe Qualification & Experience: Delhi HC

Title: DELHI TAMIL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 659

The Delhi High Court has ruled that aided minority institutions have an absolute right to appoint the Principals, teachers and other staff in the educational institutions run by them.

“The grant of aid, by the State, to the minority institution, makes no substantial difference to this legal position. At the highest, the State can regulate the proper utilization of the aid which it grants. It cannot subjugate the minority educational institution to its dictates in the matter of appointment of teachers, or Principals, on the pretext that it has granted aid to the institution,” Justice C Hari Shankar said.

Delhi High Court Awards ₹217 Crore In Lost Profits Damages To CCAI In Patent Infringement Suit Against Mobi Antenna Technologies

Case Title: Communication Component Antenna Inc v. Mobi Antenna Technologies

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 660

The Delhi High Court has awarded ₹217 crore in lost profits damages to Communication Component Antenna Inc (CCAI) in a patent infringement case against Mobi Antenna Technologies.

Delhi High Court Rejects Plea To Stop Media From Disclosing Swati Maliwal's Identity In Assault Case, Says She Is Herself Talking To Media

Title: SANSER PAL SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 661

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) to stop the media from disclosing the name of AAP Rajya Sabha MP Swati Maliwal while reporting the assault case filed by her, along with contents of the FIR.

Frame Rules To Levy Charges On Those Encroaching On Public Land: Delhi High Court To DDA, MCD

Title: KAMLESH JAIN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 662

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to devise a mechanism or frame rules to levy charges on those encroaching upon public land.

Delhi High Court Quashes Forgery Case Filed by Anchor Health Against Colgate-Palmolive

Case Title: Colgate Palmolive Company & Ors v State of NCT & Anr & Connected matters

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 663

The Delhi High Court has quashed a forgery case filed by Anchor Health and Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. against Colgate-Palmolive Company and its directors.

The case, involving allegations of forgery related to trademark registration documents, was reserved on February 28, 2024, and dismissed by Justice Amit Sharma on May 28, 2024.

Delhi High Court Grants Ex Parte Injunction Against School Functioning In Muzaffarpur (Bihar) For Violating Trademark Of Jaipuria Group

Case Title: Jaipuria Edutech Foundation vs. Shyamlalbabu Educational Trust

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 664

The Delhi High Court restrained the Defendant and all those acting for or / and on their behalf, from using plaintiffs' trademarks in respect of 'Jaipuria International Schools', 'Seth MR. Jaipuria School', as well as the device mark which is deceptively similar to plaintiffs' marks in respect of school or any other educational services.

Parents Of Victim Have History Of Long Matrimonial Discord: Delhi HC Grants Bail To Person Who Was Alleged For Raping His Daughter

Case Title: Sanjay Khatri vs. State of NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 665

Noticing that the parents of the victim have a history of matrimonial discord and they have filed multiple complaints against each other, the Delhi High Court held that age of minor victim vis-à-vis age of the accused, the family relationship between the victim and the accused and the chances of the accused threatening the victim, must be considered while deciding application in relation to offences under POCSO Act.