Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Delhi High Court while setting aside a foreign travel restriction imposed on the accused held that a Magistrate cannot alter bail conditions years after granting bail by calling it a clarification.
The Delhi High Court held that once a patent application is deemed withdrawn for failure to meet statutory timelines for national phase entry and filing Request for Examination, it cannot be revived through a belated amendment of priority date under Form 13
The Court examined the scope of Section 29-A, Representation of the People Act, 1951 and reaffirmed the limited circumstances in which deregistration is legally permissible.
The Delhi High Court granted interim relief to LinkedIn India and its Directors by staying ROC penalty orders passed for alleged non-compliance with SBO disclosure norms under Sections 89 and 90, Companies Act, 2013.
The Court condemned Wrestling Federation of India’s “National Embarrassment” remark against Vinesh Phogat with regards to 2024 Paris Olympic Games mishap, which had led to her disqualification.
The Delhi High Court acquitted a man convicted under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC, holding that the prosecutrix voluntarily accompanied and married the accused and that her minority was not conclusively established.
The Court warned that permitting reopening of quashing orders on the basis of subsequent matrimonial disputes would fundamentally defeat the object underlying exercise of jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS.
Delhi High Court set aside an assessment order passed under Sections 143(3) and 144-B, Income-tax Act after finding violation of principles of natural justice, holding that the assessing officer failed to communicate the status of the assessee’s adjournment request and ignored the reply filed by the assessee.
Prima facie, it appears to be a case of civil liability where husband purchased the car in his wife’s name, did not pay cost thereof and subsequently, when the car was returned, the civil suit filed by the complainant de facto was withdrawn.
The Delhi High Court has upheld the interim injunction in favour of Saregama India, holding that while Ilaiyaraaja retains independent copyright in the musical composition of “En Iniya Pon Nilave” under Section 13(4), Copyright Act, he had no rights over the lyrics or sound recording.
The Delhi High Court sentenced YouTuber Gulshan Pahuja to 6 months’ imprisonment for criminal contempt over derogatory videos targeting Judges and the judiciary on his “Fight 4 Judicial Reforms” channel, holding that malicious attacks on courts are not protected as fair criticism under Article 19(1)(a).
“There cannot be quarrel with the proposition that no clause can be read into the contract entered between the parties.”
Upon comparing the allegations against the appellant with those against other co-accused who were granted bail by Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court concluded that there was “no major distinction” between their respective roles.
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award holding that deduction towards Minimum Guaranteed CENVAT Credit (MGCC) shortfall was impermissible in the absence of an express contractual clause. The Court also ruled that limitation commenced from the date of actual deduction from final invoices and not from a prior notice contemplating such deduction.
The Court held that deduction for shortfall in Minimum Guaranteed CENVAT Credit (MGCC) could not be made from the net contract value, as such an interpretation would effectively result in a double deduction unsupported by the contract terms.
Delhi High Court granted interim protection from arrest in an anticipatory bail plea arising out of a transaction involving unlisted NSE shares, observing that the MoU prima facie supported the applicant’s defence and that the e-mail describing the company as “seller” was insufficient to justify custodial action.
“The entire exercise appeared aimed at achieving indirectly, through public pressure and social media campaigns, what could not be achieved directly through judicial proceedings and legal arguments before the Court — that this particular matter pertaining to discharge of respondents in the 2022 Delhi Excise Policy — be not heard by this Court.”
The respondents submitted that “the rehabilitation and relocation of the jhuggi dwellers has become essential due to the highly sensitive and strategic location of the area. The JJ clusters lie in a protected zone, immediately next to an operational Air Force Station.”
“What After Us?”: Delhi High Court Chief Justice Calls for Community-Owned Future for Adults with Autism & Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
“In view of the interest of environmental protection and the area being ecologically sensitive, all types of commercial/religious activities for any purpose whatsoever shall be restricted from the said area.”