Arunima, Author at SCC Times

Sexual Harassment| Teacher-student Relationship a ‘sacred one’; Delhi High Court upholds compulsory retirement of DU professor as punishment

Delhi High Court observed that what ultimately turned decisive was a voluntary acknowledgment by the appellant-professor of his acts of indiscretion in getting attracted by the charms of a young female student.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court | An eviction order is well within the power of District Magistrate under Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens (Amendment) Rules, 2016

Rule 22 (2) & (3) of Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens (Amendment) Rules, 2016 gives powers to the District Magistrate to pass an Order of eviction in case it is found that the senior citizens are being ill-treated and are not being maintained by their children.

Case Briefs High Courts

[Group of Companies Doctrine] Can non-signatories to an arbitration agreement be impleaded as a ‘party’ by the Arbitral Tribunal? Delhi High Court clarifies

An Arbitral Tribunal cannot arrogate to itself powers that are neither conferred by the statute, or the rules which govern the arbitration, nor can it take recourse to inherent powers, which as has been found hereinabove, are acknowledged to inhere in courts and judicial authorities only.

Case Briefs District Court

Delhi Court acquits accused(s) for committing offence similar to the plot of movie ‘Special 26’ giving benefit of doubt

If there is cogent evidence that the accused was shown to prosecution witnesses, refusal to participate in test identification parade by accused is justified and the said test identification parade cannot be used against the accused for any purpose. If identification in Test Identification Parade has taken place after the accused is shown to the witnesses, then not only is the evidence of Test Identification Parade inadmissible, even an identification in a court during trial is meaningless.

Case Briefs High Courts

Whether SEBI in exercise of powers under SEBI Act can prevent a bank from proceeding under SARFAESI Act, 2002? Delhi High Court analyses

SEBI is possessed with powers under the SEBI Act, 1992 to direct the petitioner bank in specific, and banks in general, regardless of them being registered with SEBI.

Case Briefs High Courts

PayPal is a ‘payment system operator’ under PMLA; Delhi High Court quashes monetary penalty imposed by Financial Intelligence Unit, India

All the elements of the transaction comprised or connected with a payment being effected between two parties would appear to fall within the scope of the expression ‘payment system’ as defined under Section 2(1)(rb) of the PMLA.

Case Briefs High Courts

[Hate Speech] Delhi High Court sets aside order directing registration of FIR on a complaint by IAS turned social activist Harsh Mander

Delhi High Court observed that keeping in mind the sensitive nature of the allegations and the fact that no evidence of communal disharmony had come on record during the preliminary inquiry conducted by police, the Court advises that the orders for registration of the FIR filed by any community should be passed with more circumspection.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court orders Tehelka, Tarun Tejpal to pay Rs. 2 crore compensation to a Major General in a defamation suit

Delhi High Court observed that the plaintiff was a man holding the position of Major General in the Army and was a man of repute. There cannot be worse defamation and disrepute to a person of integrity and honour than a false imputation of him having demanded and then accepted bribe of Rs. 50,000.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court imposes costs on IIT Kanpur alumni for filing frivolous litigations against Union, State authorities, departments, trusts etc.

The present case is a classic example of frivolous and vexatious litigation, where this Court encounters incoherent and confusing stories in the name of facts and absurd reliefs. Filing such cases as the present one is doubtlessly not only frivolous and vexatious, but annoying and such a litigant must be subject to some kind of sanction.

Case Briefs High Courts

[Patent Infringement] Delhi High Court restrains Canva from making available its ‘Present and Record’ feature

Delhi High Court observed that the working of the Defendant’s ‘Present and Record’ feature when compared with the Claims would demonstrate that almost all the same steps therein are present in the Defendant’s product, thus, prima facie, establishing infringement.

Case Briefs High Courts

Transportation of Mortal Remains: Delhi High Court directs MEA to make accessible SOP and Guidelines for overseas Indian tourists and workers

Delhi High Court directed MEA to prominently post and make accessible the SOP and Guidelines on its website, if not already available, within one week from the date of the order.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court refuses bail to Shakti Bhog Director in money laundering case

Delhi High Court observed that evidence placed on record lends credence to the fact that the applicant was not merely the paper director but was a director who was actively involved in the working of the SBFL.

Case Briefs High Courts

Bombay High Court directs State to pay compensation to farmers who entered Lok Adalat Settlements within 180 days

Bombay High Court observed that it is the farmer’s legal right to get compensation and for a person who is vested with a legal right, the demand for justice goes hand in hand.

Case Briefs High Courts

[POCSO] Bombay High Court upholds conviction of accused of raping a 6-year-old based on medical evidence

Bombay High Court observed that the appellant was aged 46 when the offence was committed and it has come in the evidence that he was residing with his wife and children. Still, he has ravished a small child aged six years and, therefore, no leniency can be shown against him.

Know thy Judge

Know Thy Newly Appointed Supreme Court Judge: Justice S.V. Bhatti

Justice Bhatti served as Chief Justice of Kerala High Court for 1 month before being elevated to the Supreme Court on 14-07-2023.

Case Briefs High Courts

[S. 34 Arbitration Act] Delhi High Court sets aside arbitral award for being perverse and ex-facie arbitrary

The present case is an example where substantial liability has sought to be fastened on one of the contracting parties based on specious paper calculations. It cannot be overemphasized that arbitral tribunals must exercise due care and caution while dealing with such claims.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court | Non-consideration of a clause in a concession agreement not an error that goes into the root of the award; cannot amount to patent illegality

The concession agreement is neither a statute, nor is it a law which protects the national interests of this nation and a mere failure of the arbitral tribunal to consider an argument on the same would not render the arbitral award in contravention of the fundamental policy of Indian law.

Case Briefs District Court

[POSH Act] Delhi Court directs costs of Rs 50,000 to Standard Chartered Bank for non-compliance of provisions by its Internal Complaints Committee

Delhi Court observed that it is crucial for Delhi Commission for Women to focus on substantive actions rather than superficial gestures just for the sake of publicity and bringing the name in newspaper or to find fault in the other institution when equal responsibility lies with them also.

Case Briefs High Courts

Can CCI under Competition Act inquire into the actions of patentee who asserts his rights after patent being issued in India? Delhi High Court clarifies

Delhi High Court observed that when assessed, by the maxim generalia specialibus non derogant or by the maxim lex posterior derogat priori, the Patents Act must prevail over the Competition Act on the issue of exercise of rights by a patentee under the Patents Act.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court upholds arbitral award for not falling within the mischief of Section 48(2)(b)(ii) of Arbitration Act

A challenge to an Award on the grounds of violation of “public policy” or “fundamental policy of Indian law” would be liable to be countenanced provided it is established that its enforcement would run contrary to well-established legal tenets which brook of no exception.