Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 10 To January 16, 2022

JUDGMENTS/ ORDERS THIS WEEK

1. Delhi High Court Upholds Interim Injunction Against Cigarette Brand TOPAZ For Using 'Similar Trade Dress' As TOTAL

Case Title: VST Industries Ltd. v. Rudra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 15

The Delhi High Court has upheld the ex-parte interim injunction order against TOPAZ, a cigarette brand, allegedly passing off its goods as that of another cigarette brand, TOTAL, by adopting deceptively similar packaging/ trade dress.

Justice Suresh Kumar Kait decided not to interfere with the impugned order, stating,

" the basic background colour of the packaging / cigarette box is shade of dark metallic black and dark blue colors, which is identical. Both the boxes also contain ribbed lines which run across their respective surfaces. The front and back view of the packaging is in similar font and even the placement of letter is similar."

It added,

"Plaintiff's TOTAL branded cigarettes sticks have the words 'Dual Flavor' mentioned in golden letters and defendants have mentioned the words 'Twin Flavor' on their TOPAZ cigarette and font, style, colour and placement of matter of both the sides is exactly similar. All these points were weighed in the mind of the Court when this Court had prima facie opined to grant restraint order in favour of plaintiff."

2. Christmas Advertisements By Delhi Govt: High Court Disposes Plea Seeking Action For Allegedly Wasting Public Money

Case Title: Kumar Piyush Pushkar v. GNCTD & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 16

The Delhi High Court has disposed of a PIL challenging public advertisements issued by the Delhi Government wishing Christmas to the citizens, allegedly to promote the political interests of the Aam Aadmi Party.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh noted that a representation in this regard is already pending consideration before the Committee on Content Regulation in Government Advertising (CCRGA), constituted at the directions of the Supreme Court.

Thus, it ordered,

" A Committee is already constituted by the Supreme Court. The Petitioner has already preferred a representation before the said committee and the same is pending consideration. Hence, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition."

3. Delhi High Court Sets Up Confidentiality Club To Look At Third-Party Agreements

Title: KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V. v. VIVO MOBILE COMMUNICATION CO. LTD & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 17

To maintain necessity of industry confidentiality, a single judge bench of Delhi High Court has allowed for the constitution of a confidentiality club comprising of eight lawyers and two experts to inspect third-party agreements and documents to look into alleged infringement of patents in a case pertaining to patented technology relating to radio communication.

Among the series of cases filed by Philips against Chinese companies for allegedly infringing their "Standard Essential Patent" (SEP), an interim order was pronounced on Saturday in Philip's suit against Vivo. 

The plaintiff had filed a suit seeking a decree of permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from manufacturing, assembling, importing, selling, offering for sale, advertising including through their and third-party websites, mobile phones including the models mentioned in the plaint and any further or other devices or models inclusive of UMTS enhancements and LTE technologies that result in alleged infringement of the plaintiff's patents. The plaintiff had filed an interim application seeking interrogatories to be submitted and production of certain documents under Order 11 Rules 2 and 14, read with S.151, CPC, from defendants No. 1 and 2.

4. Oil Marketing Companies Are State Instrumentalities, Empowered To Regulate Fuel Pumps In Public Interest: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd & Ors. v. All India Petroleum Dealers Association Registered & Ors., LPA 24/2021; Indian Oil Corporation Ltd & Ors. v. All Haryana Petroleum Dealers Association Registered & Ors., LPA 20/2021 and Indian Oil Corporation Ltd & Ors. v. Bihar Petroleum Dealers Association & Anr., LPA 31/2021.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 18

The Delhi High Court has upheld the power of Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) to formulate Marketing Discipline Guidelines (MDGs) in public interest, i.e., for the benefit of the consumers as well as to protect the rights of the employees at Retail Outlets (ROs).

The Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh observed,

" MDG is a Guideline issued by the OMCs, Instrumentalities of the State to regulate the R.O. Dealers."

It added that the ROs are bound by such guidelines.

" The relationship between the OMCs and the Dealers is governed by the Dealership Agreements, under which, more particularly Clause 43 thereof, the Dealers have undertaken to be bound and to comply with the rules and regulations of the Government, including the directives issued by OMCs and thus the MDGs formulated by the OMCs, are binding on the Dealers."

5. Delhi High Court Allows Plea For Appointment Of Sole Arbitrator After Withdrawal Of Claim From International Court Of Arbitration

Case Title: AMR-BBB Consortium v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd; ARB.P. 1247/2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 19

The Delhi High Court recently allowed an application seeking appointment of sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after the claimant allegedly exhausted its remedy by approaching the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).

As the Respondent party submitted that disputes are arbitrable and it has no objection if this Court appoints an Arbitrator, Justice Suresh Kumar Kait allowed the application filed under Sections 11(6) and 10(2) of the Act.

The Arbitrator is directed to ensure compliance of Section 12 of the 1996 Act before commencing the arbitration and to decide the fee after consulting with the parties. The petition was filed by a Consortium of two companies against a Public Sector Undertaking.

6. Faceless Assessment Scheme Does Not Mean No Personal Hearing, Mandatory Requirement U/S 144B Of Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., WP (C ) 14528/2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 20

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the Central government's recent 'faceless assessment scheme', launched with an aim to eliminate the human interface between the taxpayer and the income tax department, does not mean that the assess shall not be given a personal hearing.

The division bench comprising of Justices Manmohan and Navin Chawla observed,

" a quasi judicial body must normally grant a personal hearing as no assessee or litigant should get a feeling that he never got an opportunity or was deprived of an opportunity to clarify the doubts of the assessing officer/decision maker. After all confidence and faith of the public in the justness of the decision making process which has serious civil consequences is very important and that too in an authority/forum that is the first point of contact between the assessee and the Income Tax Department."

It added that the identity of the assessing officer can be hidden/protected while granting personal hearing by either creating a blank screen or by decreasing the pixel/density/resolution.

IMPORTANT WEEKLY UPDATES

1. Marital Rape - 'Classification On Basis Of Marriage Unreasonable' : Amicus Curiae Tells Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court this week continued hearing a batch of petitions challenging the exception to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which exempts forceful sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife from the offence of rape, provided the wife is above 15 years of age.

Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao, appearing as amicus curiae in the matter, told the Court that while the legislature does not say that the husband is entitled to sexually assault or abuse his wife, however the marital rape exception suggests that a man can rape his wife and get away from the prosecution of rape.

Rao had argued that "a rape is a rape" and that no amount of classification or 'legal jugglery' can alter that reality.

On the other hand, the Delhi Government submitted that the exception to Section 375 of IPC pertaining to non-criminalization of marital rape does not leave a married woman remediless pursuant to forced sexual intercourse by her husband. It also submitted that the exception does not compel a wife to have sexual intercourse with the husband and that the remedy of divorce, including other remedies under the criminal law, is available to her in such situations.

Also Read: Exception For Marital Rape Based On An Outdated Concept Of Marriage Presuming Consent : Amicus Curiae Tells Delhi High Court

Also Read: Criminalization Of Marital Rape - Taking A 'Constructive Approach'; Invited Suggestions From Stakeholders : Centre Tells Delhi High Court

Also Read: Marital Rape : Amicus Curiae In Delhi High Court Supports Striking Down Of Exception To Section 375 IPC

Also Read: Non-Criminalization Of Marital Rape Doesn't Compel Wife To Have Sexual Intercourse; Remedy Of Divorce Available: Delhi Govt Tells High Court

Also Read: Marital Rape Exception Violates Woman's Right To Dignity, Personal & Sexual Autonomy And Right To Self Expression: Petitioners Tell Delhi HC

Also Read: Marital Rape : Delhi High Court Continues Hearing Petitions Challenging Exception To Section 375 IPC

2. How Will Doorstep Ration Delivery Scheme Prevent Corruption In Public Distribution System? High Court Quizzes Delhi Govt; Judgment Reserved

The Delhi High Court has reserved its judgment in the plea filed by Delhi Sarkari Ration Dealers Sangh, opposing the State Government's scheme for door step delivery of ration.

A Division Bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh this week quizzed the Delhi Government as to how the proposed scheme is better at preventing corruption in distribution of food grains, when compared to the existing scheme involving fair price shops (FPS).

Delhi's Lieutenant Governor Anil Baijal had stalled Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's "Ghar Ghar Ration Yojana Scheme" for doorstep delivery of ration to the poor. The Centre has claimed that fair price shop owners form an integral part of the National Food Security Act and that the proposed scheme of Delhi government mitigates the architecture of the Act.

Subsequently, the Delhi Government had clarified that fair price shops will continue to exist in its proposed scheme.

It had also stated that the scheme is a "progressive reform" for targeted delivery of food grains to the marginalized and is in line with the spirit of the National Food Security Act (NFS Act) to "ensure actual delivery or supply of the foodgrains to the entitled persons".

3. DAMEPL Playing 'Hide & Seek', Not Here With Clean Hands: Delhi High Court In Plea For Enforcement Of Arbitral Award Against DMRC

The Delhi High Court this week pulled up the Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL) for playing hide and seek with the Court, adding that it was not coming to the Court with clean hands.

Justice Suresh Kumar Kait was hearing DAMEPL's plea against Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) seeking enforcement of the arbitration award dated May 11, 2017.

4. Ansals Cannot Take Benefit Of Old Age To Seek Suspension Of 7 Yr Jail Term: Police To Delhi HC In Uphaar Cinema Evidence Tampering Case

The Delhi Police this week told the Delhi High Court that the real estate barons Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal cannot take the benefit of their old age to seek suspension of the 7 year jail term awarded to them in evidence tampering case in connection with the Uphaar fire tragedy that happened in the year 1997.

Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing the petitions filed by the Ansals challenging a trial court order which had refused to suspend their jail term.

Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan appearing for the Delhi Police also added that the Ansals had made every attempt to delay the trial in the matter.

Also Read: Ansal Brothers Delayed Trial By Tampering Evidence, Can't Seek Benefit Of Old Age: Prosecution Opposes Suspension Of Sentence In Delhi HC

5. Delhi High Court Calls For Uniform Protocol Across City For Dealing With Menace Of Mosquito Infestation

The Delhi High Court this week asked the municipal corporations and local bodies to examine and identify the adequate steps for incorporating a 'common protocol' to be followed by all the authorities for dealing with the menace of mosquito infestation and spreading of vector borne diseases in the city.

Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh was of the view that the reasons for mosquito infestation and spread of vector borne diseases are not merely seasonal although they may get heightened during the monsoon period.

The Court said that there were other factors which contribute to the said menace such as collection of garbage, exposure of used tyres, utensils, tanks which collect water particularly during rains and provide an opportunity for mosquito breeding.

6. High Court Pulls Up Delhi Govt Over Inaction In Making COVID Care Centre Operational Inside JNU Campus

The Delhi High Court this week pulled up the Delhi Government over its 'inaction' and 'lethargy' in making operational the COVID care centre inside JNU campus.

Justice Rekha Palli was of the view that despite repeated orders, the direction for setting up a covid centre in JNU campus was not being followed by the Delhi Government in true letter and spirit.

Taking note of the fact that the University had already earmarked a space inside the Sabarmati dormitory for setting up the centre, the Court said that it was the inaction on the part of Delhi Government which led to the centre not being operational till date.

7. Delhi High Court Admits MJ Akbar's Appeal Against Priya Ramani's Acquittal In Criminal Defamation Case

The Delhi High Court has admitted the appeal preferred by former Union Minister MJ Akbar, against acquittal of journalist PriyaRamani in the criminal defamation case filed by him over the "metoo" sexual harassment allegations made by her.

While admitting the appeal, Justice Mukta Gupta remarked that there is no need to argue for the 'need to appeal' as complainants have the right to prefer an appeal.

Notice in the appeal was issued in August last year. The matter was adjourned as Advocate Bhavook Chauhan, appearing for Ramani, sought time to file response in the matter. It will come up for hearing in due course. 

8. Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay CIC Order Requiring Hockey India To Disclose List Of Members, Employees' Salaries Under RTI

The Delhi High Court has refused to stay the order passed by Central Information Commission (CIC) directing Hockey India to disclose certain information, including list of its members and details of employees' salaries under the Right to Information Act.

Justice Rekha Palli, who was not inclined to stay the order, was of the view that Hockey India, being a public authority, cannot shy away from disclosing the information. She added that even the salaries of judicial officers are in public domain.

The Centre supported the CIC order by submitting that the same was passed in accordance with the National Sports Code and the guidelines of the Central Government.

9. 'CBI A Specialized Agency, Won't Get Carried Away By Trial Court Observations': Delhi High Court On Anil Deshmukh's Plea Apprehending Prejudice

The Delhi High Court has said that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) will not get carried away by the observations made by a city Court while ordering further investigation against former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh in connection with the document leak case.

The matter relates to the allegations of leaking sensitive information, thereby subverting investigation into the corruption case.

Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with Deshmukh's plea against the Trial Court order which had directed CBI to conduct investigation against him.

It was Deshmukh's case that the reasons given by the Special Judge must not prejudice the mind of the CBI. Moreover, according to Deshmukh, the Trial Court order gave an impression that it was a mandate to the CBI to implicate him in the matter.