Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 11 To March 17, 2024

Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 286 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 316

NOMINAL INDEX

M/s Sabsons Agencies Private Limited Vs M/s Harihar Polymers & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 286

Godavari Projects (J.V) Vs Union of 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 287

Amanatullah Khan v. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 288

HARISH YADAV v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI LiveLaw (Del) 289

The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7 Versus Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 290

PRASAR BHARTI v. DISH TV INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 291

Indigrid Technology Pvt. Ltd Vs Genestore India Pvt. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 292

Chabbras Associates vs M/s Hscc (India) Ltd & 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 293

RAVI RANJAN SINGH v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 294

Rites Ltd Vs Ahuwalia Contract (India) Ltd. & 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 295

Aerosource India Pvt Ltd. Vs Geetanjali Aviation Pvt Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 296

INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-19 & 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 297

MANVIR @ MANISH v. STATE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 298

GOVT. NCT OF DELHI THROUGH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AND ORS v. REHMAT FATIMA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 299

SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 300

KENISHA AGRAWAL MINOR REPRESENTED BY FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN MR NITIN AGRAWAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 301

SH. CHHATTER PAL & ORS. v. STATE & 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 302

KUNWAR MAHENDER DHWAJ PRASAD SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 303

MR TALIB HASSAN DARVESH v. THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 304

BLOOMBERG TELEVISION PRODUCTION SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. v. ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 305

Commissioner Of Central Excise Versus Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 306

SFDC Ireland Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 307

Navisite India Pvt Ltd vs CIT 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 308

AAFTAB AMIN POONAWALA v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 309

DOLMA TSERING v. MOHD. AKRAM KHAN AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 310

RESILIENT INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED v. MADHURI JAIN GROVER & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 311

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 312

Sakshi v. Jawaharlal Nehru University & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 313

BTB MARKETING PVT. LTD. v. DEEPSHIKHA SINGH AND ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 314

MUNTAZMIA COMMITTEE MADARSA BEHRUL ULUM AND KABARSTAN v. DDA AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 315

PEAK XV PARTNERS ADVISORS INDIA LLP & ANR. v. JOHN DOE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 316

Requirement Of Pre-litigation Mediation Under Section 12-A Of Commercial Courts Act Is Mandatory: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s Sabsons Agencies Private Limited Vs M/s Harihar Polymers & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 286

The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Prateek Jalan held that the requirement of pre-litigation meditation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is mandatory in nature.

Section 12-A of the Act outlines the mandatory requirement for pre-institution mediation before filing a suit, provided urgent interim relief is not sought. 

Proceedings Under IBC Doesn't Exclude Court Jurisdiction To Entertain Section 11 A&C Applications: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Godavari Projects (J.V) Vs Union of India.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 287

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Sachin Datta held that proceedings contemplated in Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) do not expressly exclude the jurisdiction of the court or authorities to entertain applications under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act or other proceedings initiated by the corporate debtor against another party. It held that even if a Joint Venture is undergoing insolvency, the bench held that preclude the corporate debtor from filing an application under Section 11.

MLAs Not Above Law, Cooperating With Investigation Also Public Service: Delhi High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To AAP's Amanatullah Khan

Title: Amanatullah Khan v. ED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 288

The Delhi High Court has denied anticipatory bail to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Amanatullah Khan in a money laundering case connected to the alleged irregularities in the Delhi Waqf Board recruitment during his chairmanship.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma denied the relief to Khan taking note of his conduct of avoiding the repeated summons issued to him by ED and not joining the investigation.

Delhi High Court Grants Three Weeks Parole To NDPS Convict For Arranging Funds For Payment Of Fine

Title: HARISH YADAV v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 289

The Delhi High Court has granted three weeks parole to a man convicted under the NDPS Act on the ground of arranging funds for payment of fine in terms of the sentence awarded to him, as well as for re-establishing social ties with his family.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta observed that there were sufficient reasons for releasing the convict on parole, subject to him furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 to the satisfaction of the concerned jail superintendent.

Expression “Yes” By PCIT Couldn't Be Considered A Valid Approval U/s 151 Of Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -7 Versus Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 290

The Delhi High Court has held that the expression “yes” could not be considered to be a valid approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act.

The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed that the satisfaction arrived at by the prescribed authority under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act must be clearly discernible from the expression used at the time of affixing its signature while according approval for reassessment under Section 148.

Dish TV Cannot Claim Exclusive Right On Use Of 'Dish' Word, Not Entitled For Protection Under Trade Marks Act: Delhi High Court

Title: PRASAR BHARTI v. DISH TV INDIA LTD.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 291

The Delhi High Court has ruled that Dish TV India Limited cannot claim exclusive right to use the word “Dish” as it is generic in nature which refers to dish antenna and it will not be entitled to be protected under Section 30(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, on a standalone basis.

A division bench comprising Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan observed that the word 'Dish' appearing in Dish TV's trademark is a prominent or essential feature of its trademark, but it is not entitled to any protection.

Fraud Regarding Internal Management Of Company Doesn't Go To Root Of Contract, Dispute Is Arbitrable: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Indigrid Technology Pvt. Ltd Vs Genestore India Pvt. Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 292

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh held that fraud alleging regarding the internal management of the company doesn't go to the root of the contract. Therefore, the bench held that the dispute concerning the lack of authority to enter into a contract are arbitrable.

The bench held that the Court while deciding a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is only required to see the existence of an Arbitration Clause.

Delhi High Court Ceases Mandate Of Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Under General Conditions Of Contract

Case Title: Chabbras Associates vs M/s Hscc (India) Ltd & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 293

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma rejected the contention presented by Respondent, that the unilateral appointment of the arbitrator made in accordance with the contract cannot be challenged and the only option available to the petitioner is to challenge the mandate of the arbitrator. It emphasized that the unilateral appointment of an arbitrator as stipulated in Clause 25 of the GCC was inherently and blatantly unlawful.

Demolition: Delhi High Court Orders No Coercive Action Against Pakistani Hindu Refugee Residing In Camp At Majnu Ka Tila

Title: RAVI RANJAN SINGH v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 294

In an interim order, the Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to no take any coercive action against a Pakistani Hindu Refugee residing in the Pakistani Hindu Refugees Camp at city's Majnu Ka Tilla.

Justice Mini Pushkarna passed the order after considering the Union Government's statement recorded in another petition in 2013 stating that it shall make endeavour to extend all support to the Hindu Community which entered the country from Pakistan.

When Parties Agree For No Interest Payable Till Arbitral Award Is Made, Arbitrator Bound By This Agreement: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Rites Ltd Vs Ahuwalia Contract (India) Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 295

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that when parties agree that no interest shall be payable, the Arbitral Tribunal is bound by that agreement. The bench held that that such an agreement is not ultra vires under Section 28 of the Contract Act, 1872.

Prima Facie No Arbitration Agreement Between Parties, Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 11(5) A&C Petition

Case Title: Aerosource India Pvt Ltd. Vs Geetanjali Aviation Pvt Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 296

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma dismissed a petition filed under Section 11 (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, noting that prima facie there was no arbitration agreement between Petitioner and Respondent.

The High Court noted that Section 8(1), as amended in 2015, mandates the referral of parties to arbitration by a judicial authority unless there is prima facie finding that no valid arbitration agreement exists.

Delhi High Court Upholds ITAT Order Rejecting Congress' Plea To Stay Notice For Recovery Of Over ₹100 Cr Outstanding Tax

Title: INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-19 & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 297

The Delhi High Court has upheld the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on March 08 refusing to stay a demand notice issued to Indian National Congress for recovery of outstanding tax of more than Rs. 100 crores for the assessment year 2018-19.

“..while we find no ground to interfere with the order impugned, we dispose of the writ petition according liberty to the petitioner to approach the ITAT by way of a fresh stay application bringing to its attention the change in circumstances noticed above,” a division bench comprising Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said.

Unsafe To Rely On Child's Testimony Which Is Found To Be Tutored: Delhi HC Acquits Step-Father Convicted Under POCSO Act For Raping Minor Daughter

Title: MANVIR @ MANISH v. STATE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 298

The Delhi High Court has acquitted a stepfather who was convicted in 2015 for sexually assaulting and raping his minor daughter in 2014.

A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain observed that there were multiple reasons to grant the benefit of the doubt to the convict and that the victim's testimony did not inspire much confidence.

Surprised That Govt Which Announced 'Mahila Samman Yojna' Has Appealed Against Granting Maternity Benefits To Young Woman: Delhi HC Imposes ₹50K Costs

Title: GOVT. NCT OF DELHI THROUGH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AND ORS v. REHMAT FATIMA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 299

The Delhi High Court has expressed surprise over the Delhi Government's decision to file a “misconceived appeal” challenging a single judge order which granted maternity and medical benefits to a young woman.

A division bench of Justice Rekha Palika and Justice Shalinder Kaur took note of the Delhi Government's steps to promote the interest of women in the city, including the recently announced Mukhyamanti Samman Yojna Scheme of giving Rs. 1000 to all adult women.

Evidence Recorded In Special Enquiry Team Won't Be Relied Upon In Departmental Enquiry Against Sameer Wankhede: Delhi High Court Clarifies

Title: SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 300

The Delhi High Court has clarified that the evidence recorded in the Special Enquiry Team (SET) will not be relied upon in the departmental enquiry proposed to be held against Sameer Wankhede as per law in relation to the Cordelia cruise drugs case.

A division bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Shalinder Kaur disposed of Wankhede's plea against an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on August 21 last year in so far as it refused to quash the findings of SET.

'Policy Decision': Delhi High Court Upholds Bar On OCIs From Participating In International Maths Olympiad On Behalf Of India

Title: KENISHA AGRAWAL MINOR REPRESENTED BY FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN MR NITIN AGRAWAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 301

The Delhi High Court has upheld the decision to not allow non-citizens or Overseas Citizens of India (OCIs) to participate in the International Mathematical Olympiad, observing that it is a policy decision.

“There is, therefore, a justifiable reason for not permitting non-citizens to represent India in International Maths Olympiad, and the decision cannot, therefore, be treated as either arbitrary or taken without proper application of mind,” Justice C Hari Shankar said.

'Lackadaisical': Delhi High Court Unhappy Over Non-Compliance Of Ruling On Drafting Settlement Agreements In Matrimonial Cases

Title: SH. CHHATTER PAL & ORS. v. STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 302

The Delhi High Court has recently expressed displeasure over non-compliance of its last year's ruling wherein guidelines were framed on drafting of mediation settlement agreements in matrimonial cases, with special reference to clauses dealing with criminal cases.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that failure to effectively communicate and implement the directions poses a significant setback to the progress made in promoting ADR mechanisms.

Delhi HC Rejects Litigant's Appeal Claiming Ownership Of Land Between Ganga And Yamuna From Agra To Gurugram, Imposes ₹1 Lakh Costs

Title: KUNWAR MAHENDER DHWAJ PRASAD SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 303

The Delhi High Court has dismissed with Rs. 1 lakh costs the appeal moved by a litigant, Kunwar Mahendra Dhwaj Prasad Singh, who claimed property rights on the territory of Agra, running between rivers Yamuna and Ganga, to Meerut and other places including 65 revenue estates of Delhi, Gurugram and Uttarakhand.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora upheld the single judge's order which dismissed Singh's plea with Rs. 10,000 costs.

ED Summons Can't Be Quashed Merely Because Documents Required For Confrontation Or Probe Not Specified In It: Delhi High Court

Title: MR TALIB HASSAN DARVESH v. THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 304

The Delhi High Court has said that the summons issued by Enforcement Directorate (ED) cannot be quashed merely because relevant documents required for investigation or confrontation with an accused have not been specified in them.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta said the summoning, in exercise of statutory powers, cannot be stalled merely on mere apprehension that the accused may be arrested and prosecuted on basis of summons issued after registration of ECIR in the proceedings initiated by ED.

Delhi High Court Rejects Bloomberg's Appeal Against Trial Court Order To Take Down 'Defamatory' Article On Zee

Title: BLOOMBERG TELEVISION PRODUCTION SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. v. ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LIMITED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 305

The Delhi High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by news and media platform “The Bloomberg” against a trial court order directing it to take down an allegedly defamatory article on Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited.

Justice Shalinder Kaur upheld the trial court order and granted three days time to The Bloomberg to comply with the directions of the Additional District Judge.

Clandestine Removal And Under-Valuation Charges Can't Be Sustained Merely Based On Assumptions And Presumptions: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Commissioner Of Central Excise Versus Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 306

The Delhi High Court has held that the charges of clandestine removal and under valuation cannot be sustained merely on the basis of assumptions and presumptions. The absence of direct, credible evidence linking the respondents to the alleged offences necessitate the dismissal of the charges.

The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that the physical verification of the stocks and the absence of discrepancies in the recorded quantity of the raw material as well as the lack of evidence regarding the purchase of significant quantities of raw materials and cash undermine the presumption of unaccounted manufacture.

Services Provided By Irish Company To Its Indian Counterpart Not Technical Services: Delhi High Court Quashes Order Denying Nil/Lower TDS certificate

Case Title: SFDC Ireland Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 307

The Delhi High Court has quashed the order denying Nil or lower TDS certificates and held that the services provided by the assessee, Irish Company, to its Indian counterpart were not technical services.

The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed that though the power to grant a TDS certificate was merely a preliminary examination of the issue of taxability and had no implication on the ultimate assessment that might be made, still due consideration should be accorded to the question of chargeability to tax while examining applications made under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

ITO Can't Retain Amount Deposited By Taxpayer Without Framing Final Assessment Order During Period Of Stay: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Navisite India Pvt Ltd vs CIT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 308

The Delhi High Court allowed assessee's petition seeking refund of amounts which was deposited towards part payment of demand raised in pursuance of assessment order for AYs 2008-09 and 2009-10.

Shraddha Walkar Murder: Delhi High Court Directs Tihar Authorities To Unlock Accused Aaftab Poonawala For 8 Hrs During Day, Solitary Cell At Night

Title: AAFTAB AMIN POONAWALA v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 309

The Delhi High Court has directed the Tihar jail authorities to unlock accused Aaftab Poonawala for 8 hours during the day like other prisoners, and lodge him in the solitary cell during the night.

A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Girish Kathpalia passed the order in a habeas corpus plea moved by Poonawala.

Delhi High Court Cancels Man's 'Dolma' Trademark In Plea By 'Dolma Aunty Momos'

Title: DOLMA TSERING v. MOHD. AKRAM KHAN AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 310

The Delhi High Court has cancelled “Dolma” trademark adopted by an individual after the famous “Dolma Aunty Momos” filed a plea against its use.

Justice Anish Dayal directed that the impugned trademark be cancelled and removed from the Trade Marks Register.

Delhi High Court Restrains Ashneer Grover From Making Defamatory Statements Against BharatPe, Orders Him To Take Down Tweets

Title: RESILIENT INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED v. MADHURI JAIN GROVER & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 311

The Delhi High Court has restrained the Former Managing Director of BharatPe, Ashneer Grover, from making defamatory and derogatory statements against the fintech company or its office bearers or officials.

Justice Prathiba M Singh directed Grover to take down his tweets, including the one calling the SBI Chairperson petty, within 48 hours.

The court also directed Economics Times to take down its article published recently based on Ashneer Grover's letters written to the RBI Chairman.

How Can Litigants Verify Authenticity Of Judicial Orders? Delhi High Court Issues Directions In Suo Motu Case

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 312

The Delhi High Court has initiated a suo motu case after a forged and fabricated judicial order was allegedly handed over to a female undertrial prisoner by the jail visiting advocate.

While ordering an inquiry into the matter, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma issued various directions to the concerned stakeholders, including the general public, to verify the authenticity of judicial orders and to exercise caution and diligence when such orders are handed over to them.

[JNUSU Polls] Delhi High Court Appoints Ex-SC Judge Justice V. Ramasubramanian As Observer To Oversee Functioning Of Election Committee

Title: Sakshi v. Jawaharlal Nehru University & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 313

The Delhi High Court has appointed former Supreme Court judge, Justice V. Ramasubramanian, as an observer to exercise oversight over the activities and functions to be discharged by the Election Committee constituted for elections of the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union (JNUSU) 2023-24.

Justice Sachin Datta disposed of a plea filed by Sakshi, who has been a student in the varsity since 2021, challenging the process of conducting the elections.

Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of 'Be The Beer' Trademark In Plea By 'The Beer Cafe'

Title: BTB MARKETING PVT. LTD. v. DEEPSHIKHA SINGH AND ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 314

The Delhi High Court has ordered removal of “Be The Beer” mark from the Register of Trade Marks in a plea filed by food and beverage cafés chain “The Beer Cafe.”

“The impugned mark of respondent No.1 be removed from the register. The website of Registrar of Trade Marks be updated accordingly. The same may be done within a period of four weeks by the Registrar of Trade Marks,” Justice Anish Dayal ordered.

Delhi High Court Rejects Plea To Offer Prayers During Ramzan At Demolished 600-Yr-Old Mosque In Mehrauli

Title: MUNTAZMIA COMMITTEE MADARSA BEHRUL ULUM AND KABARSTAN v. DDA AND OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 315

The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed a plea seeking permission to offer Tarawih prayers during the month of Ramzan at the site of the recently demolished 600-year-old mosque, Masjid Akhonji, in the city's Mehrauli area.

The mosque, along with Madrasa Bahrul Uloom and various graves, were demolished by the DDA on January 30.

Justice Sachin Datta dismissed the application moved in a plea filed by Muntazmia Committee Madarsa Behrul Ulum and Kabarstan.

Delhi High Court Asks WhatsApp To Explain Mechanism Followed By It For Implementing Directions To Remove Or Block Groups

Title: PEAK XV PARTNERS ADVISORS INDIA LLP & ANR. v. JOHN DOE & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 316

The Delhi High Court has asked WhatsApp LLC to file an affidavit explaining the mechanism followed by it to identify a group by its name and the technical difficulties which it would face for implementing directions to remove or block access to the same.

Justice Sanjeev Narula sought WhatsApp's response in a suit filed by Peak XV Partners Advisors India LLP, formerly Sequoia Capital India & SEA, against various unknown persons (john doe) alleging that a fraudulent online investment and trading scheme was orchestrated by them.