Delhi High Court Monthly Digest: November 2024 [Citations 1193 - 1304]

Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1220

Mankind Pharma Limited vs. Aquakind Land LLP & ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1221

Bharat Broadband Network Ltd v. Paramount Communications Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1222

HR BUILDERS THROUGH GPA HOLDER V. DELHI AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1223

RUDRA BUILDWELL PVT LTD. v. REALWORTH INDIA PVT LTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1224

ASHNEER GROVER v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1225

N.S. ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. versus THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1226

Adani Enterprises Limited vs. Shri Somnath Fabrics Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1227

MANISH SAINI versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1228

VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1229

M/s Travel2Agent.com & Ors. vs. M/s Spice Jet Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1230

GAS AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD versus SAW PIPES LTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1231

X v. Y 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1232

SMT. REENA DEVI v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1233

SURESH KUMAR KAKKAR & ANR versus M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1234

KHALID JAHANGIR QAZI THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MS FARIDA SIDDIQI v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1235

Sanjay Bhandari vs. Directorate of Enforcement2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1236

JKR Techno Engineers Pvt Ltd v. JMD Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1237

Inder Pal Singh Gaba vs. National Investigation Agency 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1238

BALAJI STEEL TRADE versus FLUDOR BENIN S.A. AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1239

Ms Shubhangi Gupta v. Commissioner Of Customs & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1240

SMT. PROMILA RASTOGI & ORS v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1241

Raffles Education Corporation Ltd vs. State Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1242

SH. R.S. MEENA versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1243

STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ORS. versus AMAN SINGH 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1244

CENTAURUS GREEN ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED versus RAJSHREE EDUCATIONAL TRUST 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1245

ANI v. RSY News & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1246

Kanwar Singh Yadav vs. Delhi Tourism and Transport Development Corporation Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1247

Gautam Gambhir v. State 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1248

SHABANA v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1249

SUBATA KHAN v. GNCTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1250

HINA BASHIR BEIGH v. NIA and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1251

ARPIT BHARGAVA v. GNCTD & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1252

Aswhini Upadhyay v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1253

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1254

ADITYA SINGH TOMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1255

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1256

In-Time Garments Pvt. Ltd. versus HSPS Textile Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1257

P Chidambaram v. ED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1258

Aakash Goel vs. Union of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1259

SANJAY AGGARWAL v. ED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1260

HARI OM RAI v. ED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1261

PRANAV KUCKREJA (IN POLICE CUSTODY) v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1262

Netaji Subhash Institute Of Technology Versus M/S Surya Engineers & Another 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1263

JAMIA ARABIA NIZAMIA WELFARE EDUCATION SOCIETY v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS VICE CHAIRMAN & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1264

Himanshu Garg v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-36 (1) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1265

ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK (INDIA) LIMITED v. HTTPS//TUNEINCOM/PODCASTS/ARTS—CULTURE PODCASTS/ BANGLA-SUNDAY-SUSPENSE-P2082186 / AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1266

TIRUPATI NARASHIMA MURARI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1267

MATRIX CELLULAR INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED AND ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1268

Dr. R.N. Gupta Technical Educational Society versus M/s Intec Capital Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1269

Vivo Mobile India Private Limited v. Customs Authority For Advance Rulings & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1270

SACHIN KUMAR AGGARWAL v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1271

ABC v. State & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1272

M/S Srinivasa Construction Corporation Pvt Ltd Versus Irrigation Works Circle, Through Superintendent Engineer District, Uttar Pradesh 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1273

Unthinkable Solutions LLP Versus Ejohri Jewels Hub Pvt Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1274

Sandeep Hooda v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-7, Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1275

Sequential Technology International India Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known As Omniglob Information Technologies(India)Pvt.Ltd) v. Addl. CIT, Spcl.Range-7 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1276

Chandani Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal v. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1277

Louis Vuitton Malletier v/s Abdulkhaliq Abdulkader Chamadia & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1278

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7, Delhi v. Naveen Kumar Gupta 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1279

The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6 v. Nucleus Steel Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1280

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Versus M/s Fiberfill Engineers 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1281

Ban Imposed U/S 69 Of Partnership Act Has No Application To Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case Title: HARI OM SHARMA v. SAUMAN KUMAR CHATTERJEE & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1193

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that the bar of Section 69 of the Partnership Act does not come within the expression “other proceedings” as used in Section 69(3) of the Partnership Act. Therefore, the ban imposed under Section 69 has no application to the arbitral proceedings.

Case Title: Jeewraj Singh Shekhawat vs. UOI & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1194

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur granted retrospective promotion to an officer in the Central Reserve Police Force who was earlier denied the same. The Petitioner was posted abroad which resulted in him being ineligible due to not falling within the “10 years Group 'A' service” which was a mandatory condition as per the Central Reserve Police Force Group 'A' (General Duty) Officers Recruitment Rules, 2010. Observing that such circumstances were beyond the control of the Petitioner, the Court granted the benefits to the Petitioner.

When Previous Employer Accepts Resignation, New Employer Can't Deny Appointment To Selected Employee : Delhi High Court

Title: MATTHEW JOHNSON DARA v. HINDUSTAN URVARAK AND RASAYAN LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1195

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Jyoti Singh, while deciding writ petition held that if an employee has already been relieved by the previous employer, then the new employer can't deny appointment to employee who has passed the selection process.

Title: Mrs. Sonali v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1198

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation seeking directions on the Delhi Government to enhance the allocated funds of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) Councillors to atleast Rs. 15 Crores for utilization for welfare and civic activities in the national capital.

Delhi HC Closes PIL Against Delhi Tree Authority's Functioning, Says It's For The Authority To Decide If Saplings Should Be Provided To All

Case Title: Rahul Bhardwaj and Anr v. The Govt of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Anr, W.P.(C) 14940/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1199

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court recently closed a Public Interest Litigation (“PIL”) relating to functioning of the Delhi Tree Authority, noting that a Single Judge Bench of the court was already in seisin of the matter.

Delhi High Court Orders Surrender Of Sikh Leader In Ex MLC Trilochan Wazir's Murder Case

Title: STATE (NCT OF DELHI) v. HARPREET SINGH KHALSA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1200

The Delhi High Court has directed surrender of Sikh leader and former President of Jammu and Kashmir State Gurdwara Parbandhak Board, Sudershan Singh Wazir, in relation to the murder case of former National Conference MLC Trilochan Singh Wazir in September 2021.

DUSU Elections: Delhi High Court Allows Counting Of Votes On Or Before Nov 26 Provided All Defacement Is Cleaned Up By Candidates

Title: Prashant Manchanda v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1219

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi University to undertake the process of counting of votes for Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) elections on or before November 26, provided all the sites which were defaced by the contesting candidates are cleaned up and repainted within a week.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said that it is the responsibility of the candidates and the current students of DU to ensure that the next batch get to use the varsity's infrastructure in good and clean condition.

ANI Defamation Suit: Delhi HC Closes Wikipedia's Appeal Following Consent Order, Allows It To Serve Summons To Users Who 'Edited' ANI Page

Case Title: Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1220

The Delhi High Court has closed an appeal filed by Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts Wikipedia platform, against a single judge bench's order directing it to disclose subscriber details of three individuals who edited Asian News International (ANI) Wikipedia page.

Mankind v. Aquakind: Delhi High Court Issues Ex-Parte Interim Injunction Against Sale Of Pharma Products With 'KIND' Formative Trademarks

Case title: Mankind Pharma Limited vs. Aquakind Land LLP & ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1221

The Delhi High Court has issued a temporary injunction in favour of Mankind Pharma Limited, against the sale of its medical and pharmaceutical goods with the trademark 'MANKIND' and 'KIND' formative marks.

Mankind Pharma (plaintiff) is a pharmaceutical company and it has registered the trademark 'MANKIND' for various goods and services. Mankind Pharma also uses several trademarks with the suffix 'KIND' for its pharmaceutical goods.

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Bharat Broadband Network Ltd v. Paramount Communications Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1222

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee affirmed that the Court under section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award, and must only ascertain that the exercise of power by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provision

Inordinate, Unexplained Delay In Passing Award After Conclusion Of Arguments Can Be Ground To Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: HR BUILDERS THROUGH GPA HOLDER V. DELHI AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1223

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that inordinate and unexplained delay in passing an award from the date of the conclusion of the pleadings can be a ground to set it aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. In this case, the award was passed after more than 2 years from the conclusion of the arguments.

Award Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If View Taken By Arbitrator Is A Plausible View: Delhi High Court

Case Title: RUDRA BUILDWELL PVT LTD. v. REALWORTH INDIA PVT LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1224

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that conduct of the parties has to be seen before granting equitable relief for specific performance of the contract. If the conduct of the parties does not demonstrate that the party claiming relief is ready and willing to perform his part of the contract then the relief under the Specific Relief Act cannot be granted. The court in this case refused to set aside the award under section 34 of the Arbitration Act on the ground that the Arbitrator had taken a plausible view based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

Delhi High Court Cancels LOC Against Ashneer Grover, Wife After Quashing Of EOW FIR

Title: ASHNEER GROVER v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1225

The Delhi High Court has ordered cancellation of the look out circular (LOC) issued against former BharatPe Managing Director Ashneer Grover and his wife Madhuri Jain Grover after quashing of Delhi Police's Economic Offences Wing's (EOW) FIR registered last year.

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court

Case Title: N.S. ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. versus THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1226

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that de jure ineligibility to act as an arbitrator can only be waived, after dispute having arisen, by the parties by an express agreement in writing under proviso to section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act. The court further observed that this waiver is different from section 4 of the Act which can be waived even by conduct.

Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Requires Proof Of Actual Loss: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Adani Enterprises Limited vs. Shri Somnath Fabrics Private Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1227

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has upheld the Arbitral Award wherein the Tribunal had ordered a refund of Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) as the petitioner had failed to prove any actual loss. The court, in light of Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act, observed that forfeiture of the EMD requires proof of actual loss.

'Basis For Acquittal Should Be Strictly Looked Into Before Rejection', Delhi High Court Grants Appointment To Candidate As SI

Case Title: MANISH SAINI versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1228

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justices C Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain set aside the Order of the Screening Committee cancelling the appointment of a candidate based on an FIR lodged against him. Despite acquittal, the Screening Committee had cancelled the Petitioner's appointment to the Post of SI. The Bench held that the Screening Committee ought to have gone through the judgement of the Court that acquitted the Petitioner in order to determine the basis on which the Petitioner was acquitted.

Delhi High Court Orders Release Of Life Convict 26 Years After Incarceration, Calls For 'Deeper Consideration' In SRB Decisions

Title: VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1229

The Delhi High Court has ordered release of a murder convict serving life imprisonment 26 years after his incarceration by quashing the decision of Sentence Review Board (SRB) rejecting his plea for premature release by calling it arbitrary, irrational and illogical.

Arbitral Award Without Rationale For Damages Is Ex Facie Contrary To Settled Law, Can Be Set Aside: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s Travel2Agent.com & Ors. vs. M/s Spice Jet Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1230

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has observed that any award of damages, on the touch stone of Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, must be predicated on actual loss suffered. The court set aside the award for not disclosing the rationale for damages and, on this count, held that the award was ex facie contrary to settled law and in manifest disregard of the material/evidence on record.

Multi-Clause Contracts Should Be Interpreted So That A View On Any Particular Clause Doesn't Violate Another Part Of The Contract: Delhi HC

Case Title: GAS AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD versus SAW PIPES LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1231

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhhu Bakhru and Sachin Datta affirmed that the explicit terms of a contract are always the final word with regard to the intention of the parties. The multi-clause contract inter se the parties has, thus, to be understood and interpreted in a manner that any view, on a particular clause of the contract, should not do violence to another part of the contract. In this case, the court while hearing appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act upheld the impugned judgment passed by the court under section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

Delhi High Court Issues Directions To Family Courts For Dissolution Of Muslim Marriage On Basis Of Talaq Nama, Mubarat Agreement, Etc.

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1232

The Delhi High Court has passed directions for guidance of family courts in the national capital while dealing with any petition filed under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act for dissolution of marriage through extra-judicial divorce under the Muslim Personal Law.

A division bench comprising of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee directed that the Family Court, after issuing notice to the respondent, will record the statements of both parties.

Delhi High Court Presumes Man Dead Who Went 'Missing' During COVID-19 From LNJP Hospital, Grants ₹5 Lakh Compensation To Wife

Title: SMT. REENA DEVI v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1233

Presuming a man dead who purportedly went missing during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic from Lok Nayak Jai Prakash (LNJP Hospital, the Delhi High Court has recently granted Rs. 5 lakh ex-gratia compensation to his wife.

Scope Of Examination U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Confined To Existence Of Arbitration Agreement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SURESH KUMAR KAKKAR & ANR versus M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1234

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that when a non-signatory person or entity is arrayed as a party at Section 8 or Section 11 stage of the Arbitration Act, the referral court should prima facie determine the validity or existence of the arbitration agreement, as the case may be, and complex issue like whether the non-signatory is bound by the arbitration agreement must be left for the Arbitral Tribunal to decide.

What Legal Protections Should Be Granted To 'Blacklisted' OCI Cardholders Allegedly Involved In Anti-National Activities? Delhi HC Answers

Title: KHALID JAHANGIR QAZI THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MS FARIDA SIDDIQI v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1235

The Delhi High Court has explained the legal protections afforded to Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) cardholders against whom backlisting orders are issued in circumstances involving allegations of anti-national activities against them.

Delhi High Court Denies Relief To Arms Dealer Sanjay Bhandari In Challenge To Fugitive Economic Offender Notice

Case title: Sanjay Bhandari vs. Directorate of Enforcement

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1236

The Delhi High Court has rejected the petition of arms dealer Sanjay Bhandari, accused of tax evasion and money laundering, challenging a Special Court's summoning order in relation to the Enforcement Directorate's declaration of him as a 'Fugitive Economic Offender'.

Time Spent In Bona Fide Proceedings Before Court Without Jurisdiction To Be Excluded When Considering Objection On Limitation In S.11 Plea: Delhi HC

Case Title: JKR Techno Engineers Pvt Ltd v. JMD Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1237

The Delhi High Court bench comprising of Justice Subramonium Prasad, while hearing a Section 11 petition, has held that the petitioner's claim cannot be treated as dead one simply because they spent time on bona fide court proceedings before a court without jurisdiction.

Delhi High Court Rejects Inderpal Gaba's Challenge To NIA Arrest & Remand Over Protest At Indian High Commission In London

Case title: Inder Pal Singh Gaba vs. National Investigation Agency

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1238

The Delhi High Court has rejected the plea to Inder Pal Singh Gaba, allegedly involved in the protest at the High Commission of India, London, United Kingdom, challenging his arrest by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and seeking his release from custody.

Court U/S 45 Of Arbitration Act Must Refer Parties To Arbitration Unless Agreement Is Void Or Inoperative: Delhi High Court

Case Title: BALAJI STEEL TRADE versus FLUDOR BENIN S.A. AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1239

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma affirmed that Section 45 of the Arbitration Act casts a statutory mandate on Courts to refer parties to an arbitration agreement to arbitration. The only limited exception carved in Section 45 is if the Court is of the prima facie opinion that the arbitration agreement is (a) null and void; or (b) in-operative; or (c) incapable of being performed. Unless such grounds are made out, the Court has no discretion but to refer the parties to arbitration.

[Confiscation] No Provision For Waiver Of Show Cause Notice U/S 124 Of Customs Act: Delhi High Court

Case title: Ms Shubhangi Gupta v. Commissioner Of Customs & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1240

The Delhi High Court recently came to the rescue of an OCI cardholder whose luxury watch was confiscated by the Customs Department when she landed at IGI Airport, without issuance of any show cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Delhi HC Orders DDA To Pay ₹11 Lakh To Family Of Man Who Died In Balcony Collapse, Flags Structural Failures & Negligence In Maintenance

Title: SMT. PROMILA RASTOGI & ORS v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1241

The Delhi High Court has ordered the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to pay compensation of over Rs. 11 lakh to a woman and her minor sons, after her husband died after a balcony in their DDA flat collapsed 24 years ago.

Justice Dharmesh Sharma pulled up the DDA for negligence and said that it had a "continuing obligation" to ensure the flat infrastructure's "durability and longevity post-allotment".

Mere Breach Of Contract Cannot Constitute Cheating Unless Dishonest Intention Is Shown At Beginning Of Transaction: Delhi High Court

Case title: Raffles Education Corporation Ltd vs. State Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1242

The Delhi High Court has observed that a mere breach of contract does not give rise to criminal prosecution of cheating unless a fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown at the beginning of the transaction.

In doing so the high court upheld the sessions court's order which had quashed the summons issued by the magistrate to the Chairman and MD of educational technology company Educomp and its associated persons in alleged case of cheating.

'Additional Charge Of Deputy Commissioner Does Not Entitle Additional Deputy Commissioner To Pay Scale Of DC', Delhi High Court Reiterates

Case Title: SH. R.S. MEENA versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1243

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justices C Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain dismissed a Petition challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal upholding that the assignment of 'current duty charge' of the Post of DC would not entitle the Petitioner holding the Post of ADC to the pay scale as that of the DC. The Bench reiterated that the Order conferring additional charge on the Petitioner did not formally appoint him to hold full charge of the duties of DC and thus he would not be entitled to the pay-scale of the post he held the additional charge of.

'Opinion Of Dermatologist Cannot Be Ignored', Delhi High Court Directs Fresh Examination Of Candidate By Review Medical Board

Case Title: STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ORS. versus AMAN SINGH

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1244

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justices C Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain upheld the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal that directed the Staff Selection Committee to constitute a fresh Medical Board to re-examine the Respondent for determining whether he was fit for duties or not. The Court held that the Respondent was declared fit by the Dermatologist whose opinion was sought by the Review Medical Board and thus ignoring such opinion and declaring the Respondent unfit was not justified.

Pre-Requirement Of Conciliation Before Invoking Arbitration Can't Prevent Filing Of Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: CENTAURUS GREEN ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED versus RAJSHREE EDUCATIONAL TRUST

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1245

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that pre requirement of conciliation in an arbitration clause before invoking the arbitration cannot be a bar to file an application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act seeking appointment of an Arbitrator.

Delhi High Court Directs RSY News To Take Down Original Videos Of ANI In Copyright Infringement Suit

Title: ANI v. RSY News & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1246

The Delhi High Court has directed RSY News to remove or take down from its YouTube channel the original and copyrighted videos of Asian News International (ANI) in the copyright infringement suit filed by the news agency.

Objections On Capacity Of Party To Initiate Arbitration Must Be Addressed Before Tribunal, Not While Appointing Arbitrator: Delhi HC

Case Title: Kanwar Singh Yadav vs. Delhi Tourism and Transport Development Corporation Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1247

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the objections as regards the capacity of the party to initiate arbitration is an aspect which is necessarily required to be gone into the arbitration proceedings, however, the same could not preclude the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal. The court held that a party may raise appropriate jurisdictional/preliminary objections before the Arbitral Tribunal as regards the maintainability of the arbitration and/or the arbitrability of the claim.

Relief To Gautam Gambhir: Delhi High Court Stays Trial Court Order Overturning His Discharge In Cheating Case

Title: Gautam Gambhir v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1248

The Delhi High Court has stayed a trial court order which directed fresh investigation into the alleged role of former cricketer and current head coach of the Indian cricket team Gautam Gambhir in a cheating case concerning flat buyers.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri stayed the order passed by Rouse Avenue Courts on October 29 overturning the discharge of Gambhir and several others in the matter.

High Court Asks Delhi Police To Prepare Handbook For IOs To Timely Obtain Info Requested From Social Media Platforms

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1249

The Delhi High Court has recently asked the Commissioner of Delhi Police to take steps to prepare a handbook that may be utilised by the Investigating Officers (IOs) for timely furnishing of information requested by them from social media platforms.

A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma noted that in a large number of cases, IOs may not be fully aware of the manner in which information requested can be obtained from the various platforms and sometimes precious time is lost.

Ex-Gratia Payments Discretionary In Nature, Not Matter Of Right: Delhi High Court

Title: SUBATA KHAN v. GNCTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1250

The Delhi High Court has recently held that ex-gratia payments are discretionary in nature and not a matter of right.

“Ex-gratia payments are discretionary and not a matter of right. They are granted as a compassionate gesture in extraordinary circumstances, subject to the specific terms and conditions outlined in the governing policy,” Justice Sanjeev Narula said.

Terrorists Misusing Social Media, Using Journalistic Credentials To Incite Violence Are Factors Considered In Sentencing: Delhi High Court

Title: HINA BASHIR BEIGH v. NIA and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1251

The Delhi High Court has ruled that factors such as misuse of social media platforms by terrorists and using journalistic credentials for publishing magazines to incite violence are factors which cannot be ignored while awarding sentence in terrorist activities related cases.

Develop Comprehensive Action Plan To Address Bomb Threats: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: ARPIT BHARGAVA v. GNCTD & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1252

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to develop a “comprehensive action plan” including a detailed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for addressing bomb threats and related emergencies in the national capital.

Delhi High Court Closes PIL To Adopt Integrated Treatment System Under Allopathy, Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Etc

Title: Aswhini Upadhyay v. Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1253

The Delhi High Court has disposed of a public interest litigation filed by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, seeking adoption of “Indian holistic integrated medicinal system" in India.

It was Upadhyay's case that rather than segregated way of Allopathy, Ayurveda, Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy in order to secure medical treatment, medical education and consequently medical treatment granted to patients should be holistic and should encompass courses of all branches.

Sewage Treatment Plants Not Functioning Well, Releasing Raw Sewage In Yamuna: Delhi High Court

Case Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1254

The Delhi High Court has recently observed its prima facie view that the Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) in the national capital are not functioning as per required norms and are releasing raw sewage in Yamuna river.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora suggested that tamper proof meters must be installed to record operational timings of STPs as well as the electricity consumption.

'Adequate Steps Taken For The Present': High Court Closes PIL To Probe Student Suicides At NLU Delhi

Title: ADITYA SINGH TOMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1255

The Delhi High Court has recently closed a public interest litigation petition seeking constitution of an independent inquiry committee comprising of experts to investigate the causes behind student suicides at National Law University (NLU) Delhi.

Ensure Jan Aushadhi Kendras Are Opened Inside Each Hospital Within Four Weeks: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1256

The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Delhi Government to ensure that Jan Aushadhi Kendras are opened inside each hospital in the national capital within four weeks.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora observed that the convenience of having a Jan Aushadhi Kendra in each hospital for the patients and their caregivers requires no reiteration.

Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence And Substitute Arbitrator's Conclusion: Delhi High Court

Case Title: In-Time Garments Pvt. Ltd. versus HSPS Textile Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1257

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad affirmed that under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act the Court cannot re-appreciate evidence and substitute its own conclusion to the one arrived at by the Arbitrator even though a different conclusion can be arrived at on re-appreciating evidence

Aircel Maxis Case: Delhi High Court Stays Trial Court Proceedings Against P Chidambaram In ED Case

Title: P Chidambaram v. ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1258

The Delhi High Court has stayed the trial court proceedings against senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram in the money laundering case connected to the Aircel Maxis case.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri passed the order while dealing with Chidambaram's plea challenging the trial court order taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against him.

Might Lead To A Scam: Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking MHA To Share Deceased Individuals' Data With LIC For Jeevan Jyoti Scheme Claims

Case title: Aakash Goel vs. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1259

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL that sought to mandate the Ministry of Home Affairs to provide a database of deceased individuals in the country to the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC), so as to enable the family members or nominees of deceased policyholders to claim benefits under the Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana.

Not Necessary For PMLA Special Court To Record Reasons For Cognizance Of ED's Complaint: Delhi High Court

Title: SANJAY AGGARWAL v. ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1260

The Delhi High Court has recently held that it is not necessary for the Special Court under PMLA to record its reasons for taking cognizance of Enforcement Directorate (ED) complaint, unlike a private complaint under CrPC or BNSS.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed that an initial complaint can be filed by ED under Section 44 of the PMLA, even if the investigation is not fully completed.

Money Laundering Accused Can't Be Equated With Murder, Rape Accused: Delhi High Court While Granting Bail In PMLA Case

Title: HARI OM RAI v. ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1261

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday remarked that an accused in a money laundering case cannot be equated with those punishable with death, life imprisonment, ten years or more like offences such as murder, rape or dacoity.

Add 'Grounds Of Arrest' Column In Arrest Memo Forms: High Court Directs Delhi Police

Title: PRANAV KUCKREJA (IN POLICE CUSTODY) v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1262

The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi Police to add a column in the arrest memo forms for recording the 'grounds of arrest' of an accused.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said that a revised arrest memo form or some annexures to be added to ensure effective compliance with Section 50 of Cr.P.C. and the corresponding Section 47 of BNSS, 2023.

Plausible View Taken By Arbitrator Based On Facts Of Case Cannot Be Interfered With U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Netaji Subhash Institute Of Technology Versus M/S Surya Engineers & Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1263

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh affirmed that once an arbitrator has taken a plausible view based on the facts of the case, such a view cannot be interfered with under section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

Delhi High Court Orders DDA, MCD To Demarcate Their Jurisdictions; Asks LG To Consider Conducting Survey

Title: JAMIA ARABIA NIZAMIA WELFARE EDUCATION SOCIETY v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS VICE CHAIRMAN & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1264

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to demarcate their boundaries and jurisdictions in the national capital with precision (longitude and latitude) as far as possible.

Delhi HC Upholds Denial Of Capital Gain Exemption For Property Described In Sale Deed As “Makaan” But Having Brick-Kiln Construction

Case title: Himanshu Garg v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-36 (1)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1265

The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with an ITAT order declining capital gain exemption under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with respect to a property described as “makaan” (house) in the registered sale deed but in actuality having a brick kiln construction.

Delhi High Court Issues Permanent Injunction Against Copyright Infringement Of 'Mirchi' And 'Radio Mirchi' Content

Title: ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK (INDIA) LIMITED v. HTTPS//TUNEINCOM/PODCASTS/ARTS—CULTURE PODCASTS/ BANGLA-SUNDAY-SUSPENSE-P2082186 / AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1266

The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction against unauthorized broadcasting and transmission of audio content owned by Entertainment Network (India) Limited, a radio broadcaster, which owns and operates FM radio stations across the country under the trademarks 'Mirchi', 'Radio Mirchi' and 'Sunday Suspense'.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Against Registration Granted To AIMIM As Political Party

Title: TIRUPATI NARASHIMA MURARI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1267

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking quashing of the registration granted by Election Commission of India (ECI) to All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Musalimeen (AIMIM) as a political party.

Justice Prateek Jalan rejected the plea moved by one Tirupati Narashima Murari who also challenged a circular issued by ECI in 2014 granting recognition to AIMIM as a State level party in the State of Telangana.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Matrix Cellular, Others Accused Of Selling Substandard Oxygen Concentrators During COVID-19

Title: MATRIX CELLULAR INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED AND ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1268

The Delhi High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against Matrix Cellular, its CEO and others accused of selling defective and substandard oxygen concentrators at inflated prices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said that it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings at the stage while investigation is still pending.

Merit Based Review Of Arbitral Award Is Impermissible Under Section 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Dr. R.N. Gupta Technical Educational Society versus M/s Intec Capital Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1269

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Sachin Datta affirmed that the scope of jurisdiction under Section 34 and Section 37 of the Act is not akin to normal appellate jurisdiction. It is well-settled that that a merit based review of an arbitral award involving reappraisal of factual findings is impermissible. The mere possibility of an alternative view on facts or interpretation of the contract does not entitle courts to reverse the findings of the Arbitral Tribunal.

Purpose & Function Of Product Is Relevant For Classification Under 'Customs Tariff' Heading, Not Tech Used In Such Product: Delhi High Court

Case title: Vivo Mobile India Private Limited v. Customs Authority For Advance Rulings & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1270

The Delhi High Court has held that it is not the technology which is used in the product that decides its HSN classification under the Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) for the purposes of Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Victim Has Right To Participate In Trial But Can't Override Public Prosecutor: Delhi High Court

Title: SACHIN KUMAR AGGARWAL v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1271

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that a victim has a right to participate in the criminal proceedings but cannot override the Public Prosecutor who acts as an independent Officer of the Court.

Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the right of participation would always mean right to be heard but the victim's counsel cannot override an argument taken by the Public Prosecutor nor can the victim argue that the Public Prosecutor has made a wrong submission.

No Public Interest In Keeping Information Alive On Internet After Quashing Of FIR: Delhi High Court On Right To Be Forgotten

Title: ABC v. State & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1272

Observing that it is important to balance the right to information of public with an individual's right to privacy, the Delhi High Court has said that no public interest can be served by keeping the information alive on the internet after quashing of criminal proceedings.

Court's Supervisory Role Over Arbitral Proceedings Would Be Determined As Per CPC If No Neutral Location Is Specified: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Srinivasa Construction Corporation Pvt Ltd Versus Irrigation Works Circle, Through Superintendent Engineer District, Uttar Pradesh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1273

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh affirmed that if there is a neutral location specified in the contract data, that location would be the place of arbitration and the court having supervisory jurisdiction over the place would have jurisdiction. If no such location is specified, the provisions of the CPC from sections 16 to 20 would be attracted for determining the supervisory jurisdiction of the court.

Arbitration Clause From Another Contract Can Be Incorporated Into Contract Only By Specific Reference: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Unthinkable Solutions LLP Versus Ejohri Jewels Hub Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1274

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad affirmed that the arbitration clause from another contract can be incorporated into the contract when there is a clear intention that arbitration clause contained in another contract would also be incorporated in the contract by which the disputes would be resolved.

Putting Together Structure Of Plywood Sheets Can't Be Construed As Constructing 'Residential House' For Claiming Capital Gain Exemption: Delhi HC

Case title: Sandeep Hooda v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-7, Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1275

“Putting together a structure of plywood sheets cannot be construed as constructing a residential house,” the Delhi High Court has held.

It thus upheld an ITAT order which disallowed capital gains exemption to the appellant-assessee under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that a mere 'makeshift' structure was raised in the name of residential house.

Transfer Pricing-Assessee's Objections On 'Functional Dissimilarity' Not Adjudicated: Delhi HC Asks TPO To Determine Comparable Entity Afresh

Case title: Sequential Technology International India Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known As Omniglob Information Technologies(India)Pvt.Ltd) v. Addl. CIT, Spcl.Range-7

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1276

The Delhi High Court recently directed a Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to determine afresh the inclusion of a comparable entity with respect to an assessee, this time taking into consideration the latter's objections on 'functional dissimilarity' of the two.

'Shocking State Of Affairs': Delhi High Court Asks Authorities To Remove 'Illegal Activities' At Chandni Chowk Redevelopment Project Area

Case Title: Chandani Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal v. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1277

The Delhi High Court has directed the city authorities to remove the deficiencies and illegal activities at the Chandni Chowk redevelopment project and surrounding areas.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that prima facie, the illegal activities and deficiencies in the area must be attended to and removed by the MCD and Delhi Police in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. The court further asked the concerned DCP as well as DC to remain personally present in court on the next date of hearing.

Delhi High Court Permanently Restrains Two Businessmen From Infringing Trademark Of French Luxury Brand Louis Vuitton

Case title: Louis Vuitton Malletier v/s Abdulkhaliq Abdulkader Chamadia & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1278

The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction in favour of the French luxury brand Louis Vuitton, against trademark infringement and passing off of its products bearing the 'LV' trademark by two businessmen.

Recourse To Section 147 Of Income Tax Act Not Barred In Cases Where Assessing Officer Is Empowered To Proceed U/S 153C: Delhi High Court

Case title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7, Delhi v. Naveen Kumar Gupta

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1279

The Delhi High Court has held that Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 does not by itself preclude an Assessing Officer from reopening assessments under Section 147/148 of the Act, on the basis of information found during a search conducted under Section 132 or requisition made under Section 132A of Act in respect of another person.

Assessing Officer Not Required To Examine Commercial Expediency Of Transaction When Evaluating Assessee's Explanation U/S 68 Of IT Act: Delhi HC

Case title: The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-6 v. Nucleus Steel Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1280

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that once an assessee offers explanation about nature and source of a credit transaction standing in its books, the burden of proof to show that such explanation is unsatisfactory shifts on the Assessing Officer.

Award In Which Damages Are Awarded In Absence Of Proven Loss Or Injury Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 On Grounds Of Patent Illegality: Delhi HC

Case Title: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Versus M/s Fiberfill Engineers

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1281

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Sachin Datta has held that awarding damages by Arbitrator in the absence of proven injury or loss qualifies to be a patent illegality under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Such an award is liable to be set aside under section 34.