Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 28 To November 03, 2024

PANKAJ KUMAR TIWARI v. ED and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1181

NARESH KUMAR BAJAJ v. BUNGE INDIA PVT. LTD. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1182

Civil And Sessions Court Stenographers Association (Regd) & Anr vs. Shri Vijay Kumar Dev 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1183

Ram Niwas versus Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1184

Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran vs. The Union Of India & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1185

Shadab Ahmad v State of NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1186

Union of India vs. OCL Iron and Steel Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1187

M/s Jain Cement Udyog (Through Its Proprietor Sh. Sanjay Jain) v. Sales Tax Officer Class-II 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1188

SOCIAL JURIST, A CIVIL RIGHTS GROUP V/s MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1189

Vaibhav Jain vs. Directorate Of Enforcement & Connected Matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1190

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION V.SPRING TRAVELS PVT LTD 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1191

M/S INNOVATIVE FACILITY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD v. M/S AFFORDABLE INFRASTRUCTURE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1192

Impermissible To Use Section 45 Of PMLA As Tool For Incarceration When Delay In Trial Not Attributable To Accused: Delhi High Court

Title: PANKAJ KUMAR TIWARI v. ED and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1181

The Delhi High Court has held that keeping an accused in custody by using Section 45 of PMLA as a tool for incarceration is not permissible where the delay in trial is not attributable to the accused.

Not Every Legal Mistake Made by Arbitral Tribunal Is Patent Illegality, Scope Limited To Substantive Laws: Delhi High Court

Case Title: NARESH KUMAR BAJAJ v. BUNGE INDIA PVT. LTD.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1182

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that patent illegality applies only to violations of substantive law of India, the Arbitration Act, or the rules applicable to the substance of the dispute. It does not apply to every legal mistake made by the arbitral tribunal.

'Dismaying' That Despite Approval From Acting Chief Justice To Upgrade Pay-Scale Of Stenographers, Govt Did Not Release Arrears: Delhi High Court

Case title: Civil And Sessions Court Stenographers Association (Regd) & Anr vs. Shri Vijay Kumar Dev

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1183

The Delhi High Court recently expressed its dismay against the Delhi government for not upgrading the pay scales of certain stenographers working in the Delhi District Courts, despite the Acting Chief Justice approving an administrative note concerning the revised pay scales.

Temporary Suspension Of Business Activity On Account Of Ill Health Does Not Warrant Cancellation Of Taxpayer's GST Registration: Delhi HC

Case Title: Ram Niwas versus Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1184

Finding that proper officer passed the order cancelling taxpayer's GST registration with retrospective effect, the Delhi High Court clarified that such order does not indicate any reason for cancelling the GST registration much less from retrospective effect.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Let Leader Of Transnational Govt Of Tamil Eelam Intervene In UAPA Proceedings On LTTE Ban

Case title: Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran vs. The Union Of India & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1185

The Delhi High Court has dismissed the petition of Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran, who claimed to be the Prime Minister of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE), for impleadment in UAPA Tribunal proceedings concerning the declaration of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as unlawful association.

Delhi High Court Relaxes 2020 Riots Case Accused's Bail Condition, Permits Him To Travel Outside The City To Attend Sister's Wedding

Case title: Shadab Ahmad v State of NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1186

Relaxing a condition imposed in a 2021 order while granting bail to a man booked in connection with the murder of Head Constable Ratan Lal during the 2020 North-East riots, the Delhi High Court has permitted the man to attend his sister's wedding in Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh.

No Surprise Claims Can Be Flung Or Sprung Upon Corporate Debtor Once Resolution Plan Is Approved: Delhi High Court

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

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1187

The Delhi High Court bench comprising Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela has reiterated that once a Resolution Plan is approved by NCLT, all prior claims against the Corporate Debtor are extinguished under the "clean slate" theory.

Two Adjudication Orders Against One Show Cause Notice For The Same Period Is Not Permissible: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s Jain Cement Udyog (Through Its Proprietor Sh. Sanjay Jain) v. Sales Tax Officer Class-II

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1188

The Delhi High Court stated that two adjudication orders against one show cause notice for the same period is not permissible.

The Division Bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja was dealing with a case where a show-cause notice had been issued to the assessee under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017. This notice was duly adjudicated by the department, resulting in an order.

"Matter Involves International Issues, Policy Decision To Be Taken By Centre": Delhi HC On PIL To Grant Admission To Rohingya Refugee Children

Case title: SOCIAL JURIST, A CIVIL RIGHTS GROUP V/s MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1189

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking directions to the Delhi government and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to grant admission to Rohingya refugee children in local schools.

Delhi High Court Grant Bail To 2 Co-Accused In Money Laundering Case Involving Satyendra Jain, Says Parity Applicable In PMLA Cases

Case title: Vaibhav Jain vs. Directorate Of Enforcement & Connected Matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1190

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain in the money laundering case involving AAP leader Satyendra Jain.

Enforcement Court U/S 48 Of Arbitration Act Can Refuse To Enforce Foreign Award But Cannot Set It Aside: Delhi High Court

Case Title: INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION V.SPRING TRAVELS PVT LTD

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1191

The Delhi High Court Bench of Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh affirmed that the power to set aside a foreign award lies only with the courts at the seat of the arbitration, which exercise primary/supervisory jurisdiction over the matter. Even if grounds under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act can be made out, the Court being the enforcement court and having only secondary jurisdiction over the foreign award cannot set aside the award but may only “refuse” its enforcement.

Agreement Between Parties Must Be Given Primacy When Deciding Petition U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S INNOVATIVE FACILITY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD v. M/S AFFORDABLE INFRASTRUCTURE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1192

The Delhi High Court Bench of Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh held that the role of the court under section 9 of the Arbitration Act is to preserve the subject matter of the Arbitration till the arbitral tribunal decides the claims on merits. Whether termination of the agreement was valid or not is not be decided by the court at section 9 stage. Primacy to agreement between the parties has to be given while deciding petition under 9 of Arbitration Act.